An answer [by L. Atterbury] to a popish book, intituled, A true and modest account of the chief ...

Google

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on Hbrary shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project

to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.

Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the

publisher to a library and finally to you.

Usage guidelines

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we liave taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.
We also ask that you:

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.

+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe.

About Google Book Search

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web

at |http : //books . google . com/|

if

*

• .■

->• ••

SS^'txWJiS^'^'^

'•f

I

^

J

J

•*

AN

Answer toaPdpifliBooK,

INTITULED,

A True and Modefi Account of the Chief
Joints in ControVerpCy hetmen the K.6-
man Catholicks and the Proteftanb.

Together with fome Confiderations upon the

SERMON Sof a DIVIN E of the

Church of kngldnil. By H. C.

WHEREIN

The O B J £ CT I O N S KC. has bfought

againft iheARGtJMENTS which His Grace

J O H N,

Late Lord Archbiflhiop of Canterhuryy

Made ufe of in

His S E H M o N s againft Tdperj,

Are.confidered ; and anfwered on thcfc following Heads :

I. The Church, cf Rome

not Cathplick,
2- The SHfremacj.

3. The Mallibilltj of the
Church.

4. Tranfubfiantiation.

5*. Communion in one Kind,

6. Frayers in an imhntmm
Tongue.

7. The InvocatioH ef
Saints.

8. Images.

9. Purgatory.

10. Indulgences.

Defignd for the Ufe offuch as are in danger of being per-
verted by the Emijjaries of the Church of Rome.

y am fuU^ cont)tncel»3 ti^at tbc 3lnfoient 1i5c|)atiiotfr ^
t^e ^a|)ifts ibas maDe tB^dt ^ou az>btfe Hecelliar^ to U
iionc^ for tl)e &tkfztt. of m^ petfon auD (S^otictnmetitj aia
ti^c caieifate of m^ f^eo^ic.

Her Majeffy's rnoft Gracious Anfwet to tVi't iicyt^s KiLV^*-* \

L O JSr b ON: Printed for W. Hawes, ix.xJofc'ftVbU >vw\
I(<fi in Liidgiite^fireet., 1 n o ^>

■ • ■ V."

A

V

^ks ^^teJfor W. Hawes, at th^ Bible fiy/
Rofe in Ludgate-fireet. '

TE^ Sermons^ preached before her Royal
Jlighnefs the Princeis Anw o^Ucjmark.

A Second Volume of S^rmons^ preach*d a|
Whitehall and St. James's.

Some ]Letters relating to the Hiftory of tho
Council of 2>/»^ Publiih'd by LeTnis Atterlmrj^
1,L.D.

A Thankfgiving Sermon for the Vidory 4t the
pafling the Lines^ by his jGrace John Du^ .df
filarlborough^ Anno 1705'.

An Anfwer to a Popifh Book, intituled, 4 ^^
and Modeft Account (f tqe Chief Points in Controverfiel^
between the Roman Catholicks and the Proteftant^b
together with fome Conliderations upon the $er«
inons of a Divine of the Church rf England. ]E^
Jf. C. Wherein the Obje(9;ions K C. has brougki;
againft the Arguments which His Grace J^fm^
late Lord Archbifliop of Canierhny, made iiife of in
his Sermons againft Popery, are confidefed, an4
anfwerd.

The Grounds and Principles of the Chriftiati
Religion, explained in a Catechetical Difcourfej
for the Inftrudion of Young People*

A Companion for the AfHided , whether 10
Mind, Body, or Eftate. Being a Colle<!lion of
Texts of Scriptures, and Forms of Prayer, fuitpd
CO the feveral Conditions of Perfonsin Afflidion;
CO which is added Diredions and Prayers, for the
Receiving the Holy Sacrament, and a Morning
and Evening Prayer for the ufe of Familic&« %^

^0in Lewis, KeAot of Acryfcj in the Diocefi of

£anterb$$rj.

Fourteen Sermons preach'd at St. Jamtis
'li^burch in Wefiminfier^ on feveral Occafiopsr. By
the Right ReV;^rejid leather in God^ Charles Hkk^
ntaHj Lord Bifliopof £09^(?fi-Dm7.

Effays Ecctefiafticai and Civil. Containing
Learned and Judicious Difcourfes on feveral Sub-
jeds. ' By rfie late Learned Sir Bulftrode Wbitlocke,
Kt. Lord Keeper of the Great Seal^ and Ambaf-
fadour from Oliver Cromwell , and the Common-
wealth of England to Chrifika Queen of Sweden.

A Continuation of Drumniond\ Hiftory of SeoU
land, from the Death of King Jatnes V. In Four
Booits. Wherdin niany fecret and memorable
Tranfa<Si:i6ns ( relating to both Kingdoms ) are
brought to Light, .

A Treatife concerning the Lawfulnefs of In-
ftrumental Mufick in Holy Offices. By Henry
DodweB. M. A.

An Effay towards the Theory of the Ideal or
Intelligible Worjd. In Two Parts. , Thd Firrf
ionfiderirfg it abfolutely in it felf, and the Second
in Relation' to rfum^n* Cndefftanding. In' Two
Volumes. By John Norrh, Reftor of Semerton
iiear Sarum.

The Church Catechifm explaind by way of
Queftion and Anfwer ,• and confirmed by Scri-
tftre Proofs.

Jo^uab\ Charge. Two Afliizfc-Serrilons ijgainft
Hypocri'fie and fndiffereiice in Religion : The
firft preach'd at Taunton, Nfarch 20*. 1704— y. the
fecond at Wells ^ Augufi ly. 170J. By Charles
yones^ L. L. 6. late I^llow of ISTew- College in Ox-
fhrd { now Redor of Nettlecemh' and High- Ham in
Somerfet'jhire ; and Chaplain to the Right Honou-
rable Thomas Earl of Penfhoke, Lord Prdident of
the Council.

3

ANSWER

TO THE

PREFACE.

TH E De^ti of the Book intitnleii
A Trm and Mode^ Aixomttj&cc. being
as the Author telk us in the begins
ning of his Preface^ To mfn^er tit mofi
MM9riMl O^jeSimt in Dr. TiWotfotk's Stmons ; a§
ftlfo 3 To Utj dfWn the Grounds on which the Popifli
Religion ff fiunded. My Buiioefs at prefem /ball
be^ o/ily to make good the Force of thofe Argu<-
ments which his Grace has urg'd againft Popetjti
and to ihtvir that chey ftill remain firm and un-
fliaken^ notwkhftamling all thc^e Obje<^oAs
which have been b^ughc againft them ; re«
Serving the Coniideration of the Grounds m which
the Popifli Religion is (bunded to a Second
Patt , that this Trcatife may not fwell to too
large a .bulk , but be more tifefol to convince
thofe of their Errors who have been bred up
in the Communion of the Church (fKomc ; and
toconfirm fuch who are unfetded in their Prin-
ciples, in the ferious Belief of the Trottfiant Re-

ligion.

For tho' we have many EKcellent Books , in
which the ControVerfies between the G6«t«^ ^
Rwte and the Trx^tefi^ants are B\aVft\if ft^it^ ^ A^A

4- Anfwer to the preface.

Iblidly and learnedly difcufs'd; yet they are tn
,a great meafure rendered inefTedual ; becaufe the
Generality of thofe who live in Communion
with the Church of Rome , either want the Willy
or the Ability ^ or . Permiffion to read them i
But the ArchbJfi)of$ Sermons, befides the Plainnefs
and Familiarity of the Expreffionjand the other
Beauties of the Stile , have alfo this Advantage
beyond other Controversial Wrkings ; that -his
Arguments againft Voferj^ being intermixt with
more Pradical Truths , are' read with Pleafure
and Delight, by fuch Perfons who would never
endure the fatigue of turning oyer, and con f>-
dering a Book writ elofely , and confifting only
of dry Argutnientation.

The Vafifis are taught to believe as their
Chiirch believes , without weighing or confi-
dering why they do fo ,• they muft not truft
their own Underftandings, nor their Senfes in
Matters of the neareft Importance, which con-
cern their Eternal Salvation ^ but repofe them-
felves on their infallible Guide, and give them-
felves upintirely toils Condu<5l : They are kept
as much as 'tis poflible in the dark, and diverted
from reading any Controverfies in Religion,
even thofe which are written by their own Au--*
thors] which is the Reafon why their great
Champion BeUarmine is fo (carce in Vofifh- Coun-
tries. And from hence it was, that the Gentle-
woman, for whofe S?tisfa<Sion N.C, wrote, his
Book^ who had never, took the fains to in^
quire into the Reafm of her Faith , nor had conft-
der'd what the Scriptures liiy ol the Articles of
\iti Creed, wasfo furprizd when fhc firtt read the
Arckbifljofs Sermo?^s^ where ^he crafty Wilinefe

W the Pfipijis is fo plainly dete(fied , and their

Super-

Anfwtr to tl)e preface. 5

Superftition and Idolatry prov'd , hy fuch evi-
^nc Arguments and undeniable Fads; that
tho' they may find out many fpecious Pre-
tences, nice Diftindions, and fubtle Evafions, to
impofe upon the Unwary and Ignorant, and to
deceive the weak in Faith j yet will they bo
manifeft to every conliderate and unprejudiced
Reader.* N. C. indeed pretends to have remov'<i
his Lady s ScrufUsy and to refute the Archbifliop
by Scripture, Keafon, and the Authority of the
Fathers j but if he made ufe of ho other Argu-
ments than rhofe he is pleasM to afFord us in hi«
Book, I believe the Reader will foon judge on
how Sandy a Foundation her SatkfaSkn was
built.

For his ufual coqrfe thro' the whole Work, is
rather to obfcure, than enlighten his Subjed ,• to
render the Controverfy more perplex d, inftead
of explaining it; to introduce fome nice and
unintelligible Notion of the Schools , to niif-r
apply fome plain Text of Scripture, to quot«
fome Half^Sentence out of the Fathers , to fur-
nifh out fome ftal6 Argument, which neither
that poor Lady; who had never httn fufficientlj
infituUtd in the Princifles cf her Religion , nor any

plain and illiterate Reader can underftand ,• and
provided he fays fomething with an Appearance
of Truth , 'tis no matter how little to the pur-
pofo : Whereas he ought to have grounded his
Arguments on the Holy Scripture and folid Rea-
fon ; and to have made Proof of the Popiflj Te-
Dents, by fuch plain, eafy, and familiar Argu«
ments, that every Rational Perfoh might under-
ftand them, fuch as the Archbifhop s incompara*
bl$ Sermons every where abound with.

A ? fop

4 Anjmr to the ^rtfttce.

For 'ds ttbt to be kiutgm'd^ that ehd %txdk off
tmr Salvadon (hould depoEid on Secular Learcr*
ing 3 or the reading the Schoolmen or Fathers ^
no, we have a mwefure Wa^jL^Ttipitn^fta wbkb
ifwi give keed w^ fiiaA Sjfftt}^ which h fo plam
and evident in all Poino abfolueely ndceffary to
Salvation, that b^wh rtms mat readii. Tis from the
Holy Scriptures alone, th(^0 Fmm^inucfLiviMg^tVa^
Hr^ from whence we derive all the Ftandamental
Article9 of our Faith ^ i^nd' are inft ruined in all
tb^ neceiTary Trutha 6i our Religion : And
tho' the Fathers of the Cluireh are^hedd by us in
great Efteem,. efjpiecially thdb vAscx wrote in the
^ft Centurifisr, whUft theChtiftian Rdigion
continued pure and uncorrupted j and we hy a

Sreai Strefs on the Audioriqr ot fbdi Ecclefia-
ical Hiftoriana ^ as were Men of Probity and
Vertue : Yeit: do we look with far greater ¥e«
deration on tiiofe Divine Boofts, which were
pttn'd by £fae Immediate Infplracion: of the
Holy Ghoila Not that we have tbt lead
Sufpicion, that the frcu^nt Religkmi will not
bear a Tryal by the Ancient UsHkrr of tbi Churchy
or maint^ its^ Claim to Antiquity and Po^
rity by the dint of Secular Learning : Thi» ha$
been made out long ago^ bjetyond alt Ccnstradi**
^ony andfevendof ourLoarnedilMvines^ha^e
challenged xh^.Va^fisi ta . produce one Sentence
gut of the Ancient Fathers in Favour of P^ff
which was not foifted into them ^ or the Text
corrupted. The Papifts do indeed make cheii^
l^ags of the Unity^ Univerfality^ and Antiquity
of their Ctmoky and hereby too often \m^
pofeopon the unlearned and unwary Reader:
But 'twill be evidem to every one wl»
earefully examines^ and look^ narrowly into

the

jhifmr to the ^nfact. f

the Gratundt of their j^ittenctfs ; ^l f^fen U
a tate Invention ^ incroduc'd bj degrees into
the Chiiftian Churchy conrifting of lAiToVations
in Faith and Pradice^ devis'd on purpofe to
iupport the Grandeur ai^d Tem{K>ral Interel^ of
the Cbmrib of Reme; and that 'tis widely dif-
fetisnt ftam that Pfofdffion of Faith delivered
dotivn by Chrift atid his Apdfttes ^ and beiiev'd
and praais'd in the Pureft Ages of the Church.
This might eafily be nfkide good, but at prefent
I (hall confine my ielf only to thole Argdmenti
which hf Grace has ixrg'd in his Sermons ; as
being adapted to the meaneft Capacity ^ an4
thofe of the weaker Sex, who are in moft dan-
ger of being perverted by the Emiflaries of the
Citttci ^ Rmi : And if I do not give his
teamed CitattOifts a foU Animadverfion here, I
hope it Witl Act be efteem'd a faalty Omiffion
in me { fince Nl C. tells us^ the main Deilgn of
his Book in, u mfituS the Weak and ^orant^ and
not to fleafi the Cttfiem.

In tw^ things, NIC. befpeaksthe Readers
Fairoar, alkl pleads for his Excufe,

Firft ^ that he doth not give the ArchbUhop
his due Tide, and for this the Reafon is obvious ,
tho' he will not fpeak out , and tell us plainly,
chat he doth not own him to be a Bilhcp : But
there can be no Shadow of a Reafon given, nor
the leaft Excufe pretended, for thofe hard
Wetds^ as he calls themj that Rude and Scurri-
louis Treatment which he beftows oh this moflt
Reverend Prelate , fo freely in fevcral parts of
his Book i efpiscially, when he gave us hopes
of mote civil ufage, by promifing , That be

TVbdd fk^ aU the RefffcB that plight i?e expeSfed^
mtfht^ hettaying the Canfe j But 'ni plain , by

8 Anfwer to the preface.

that Liberty of S pee fib, which he ufes, that even
in matters of common Civility , and decency
of Expreffion ^ Faitb is not to be kept with Here^
tifh.

Had he tranfgrib'd that Copy the Good Arch-
hifhop fet him ^ he might havp learn d , that
Controvjsrfies may be managed with Civility,
and a due Refped to the Chara(5tcrs of our Ad-
re rfaries^ without betraying the Caufe ; that foft
Words, and A^r// Arguments, are of greater force
than Calumny and Railing ,* and that the
fmooch and oily Stile fmks deeper, and makes
I more lafting Jmpreilion , than the Salt and
Vinegar pf the more Paffionate Controvert
tills.

It is true, the Archhilbop fometimes diverts
)iimfelf and his jleader with the Foppery and
Jmpertinencie? of the Topijh Authors, their qn-
found Reafonings and abfurd Confequ^nces ,
but' never at the e^pence of good Manners, or
good Breeding ,• he every where mingles
his (harpeft Reflet^ions on the Caufe , with
- iCharity to the Perfon, reconciles Contro-
erfy with Good Nature, and hath Ihcwn him-
felf to be not only a Skilful Divine , and an
Able Difputant j but alfo a Good Man, and one
pf the civil^ft Gentleman-iike Perfons in the
World.

The fepond Ad^refs which N. C. makes, is to
the Magiftrate« He was, i|t feems, aware that
fuch poyfonous Doiftrine, fuch feditious Princi-
ples^ fudi infolent Railing, was likely to awaken
the Governours of our Church and State, and.
%o whet the Edgp of Penal Laws againft ?opi[h
]^ecufants ,• who live fecurely and peaceably,
and are proied^fj in their jProperties and Uber-

ticS|

I

Anfwer. to the ^refaal 9

iScs, wMft the Trotefiants in Foreign Parts fuP*
fer Perfecution^: and undergo the levereft Pe»
nalties for the &ke of Religion, and agood Coh-^
icience ; But bis blind and intemperate Zeal'
made him turn a deaf Ear to thofe Carnal Ma»^
tives^ and to difregard all prudential Confide-'
rations, fo he could but advance the End of hW.
Miffion, the making Profely tes to the Tofifii Re-,
ligion ; which may give us a feafonable intimav'
tioaof the dangerous Confequence of harboqr-^)
ing fuoh furious 2^alots in Protefiant Countnes. •

I do not write this to incenfethe Magiftracei.
againft them, or to promote a profecution of
the Penal Laws ; For I could wifh that Liber*'
ty ofConfcience,in Matters purely fpeculative,
which, is fo agreeable to the Law of Nature,
were the Law of Nations too : But 'tis 'certaiii>»
ly the Duty of the Magiftrate^ and an Eflential
Part of his Office to take care, Niquid detrimtn-'^
tl Refpiiblica capiat, that the Community receive
no Prejudice from the bitter Zeal and fuperfK-
tious Capriches of the Emiflaries of the Church
of Rome.

For the Tafifis are not fo inconfiderable a
Party in England as fome Men are pleas'd to re-
prefent them : Their Revenues here fet apart
For the propagating the Faith are verj' great, near
Fourfcore - thoufand Pounds fir Ann. and their
Priefts very numerous, and by fome of their own
Religion faid to amount to Three thoufand $
which I have the more reafon to give credit to, by
comparing this Account with tiut of the Priefts
in Ireland, where they are much more numerous,
as the Lift of their Names given in to the Go-
vernment^by the Articles of LimerieiymW inform
U%f . Add to this^ that they ate all dependent on a

Anfwtr to the preface.

Foneigti Head ^ and foi^ited by a poweHiil
Confederacy ; and cheo I chtnk ic will appear
ht^Iy reaiotiable^ that fuch cart ought to be
oAeu^ that it may not be in their power to di-
fiorb the Government^ and to make us and them^
tAf€B too. Slaves to the Ambition of a Univer&f
Monarch. And that this h no Chimera^ or mi-
grounded Suppofition is plain ^ from that Con«
cem which the Pafi/ls here hi E^lmd ahvays
exprefi for the intereft of Vrunct, and that iq
the higheft d^ree { as plainly ^ppear'd by their
ftefiifal^ to comply with the Invitation of the
Fcrmgsl Ambai&dor on the Day for the Publick
Thankfgiving forthe Vidory oiMmbdm; Which
will remain a lafting and notorious Inftaiice of
their Difaffedion to oar Government^ as well
aff^Religioo.

) 'Tis true, the Sons of tbs Church of En^ni
are mild^ patient and charitable^ ready to give
a^ kind and friendly Reception to all thofe who
difbr from them^ and live peaceably and quiet-
ly under the Govemfnent j but 'tis the Intereft
of thefe Gentlemen to cake care that they do not
abufe this Patience (as this Author has done) by
reviling the Govemours of our Church with
fuch opprobrious Language, printing Books in
which their bafled Arguments are trump'd qp
jigain^ and only varniih'd over in Order to de^
ceive poor ignorant People, and (educe them
fipom their Religion and Allegiance, for Lief4
Tfmientiafit Fwrw.

I readily acknowledge , tliat feveral of out
jE^yb fafifti are Men of excellent Tempers,
^na (even contrary to their Principles) have
behav'd themfelves Loyally in a (ime of Trial.

»a4

Anfwer to the preface. 1 1

and are affe^onacely concern'd for the Good of
their native Conntrjr; and I am heartily ferry
thqr are not alt fb : For when the Leadeis and
Guides of their Confciences are once arriv'd to
that hoUneiL as tQ tett us eo our Faces afid the
whoU WorkLUi Prints that we are Schiimaticks
and Hereticks^ and to upbraid us with that Sa«
crilege which was> committed in Toftjjk Times^
and by zealous Va^ifis ^ which they themfelves
areotof guSty of; by nbhibing the People of the
Cup in the Sacrament^ of the Holy Scriptures^
and as the Archbifliop ingenioufly exprefTes it^
JtiJif^ a7iH9 ^^^ Temb CfnmaudmeM m the Fate if
Ae Eigbeb j and wiicii thists dooe at a dme vAen
(^% the Authoe liimfilfacknowiedges) tbey^me
aaer^look'd ij tbtQgvej/mmentj and fartshe targAef
the unmer^ed Goadmfi and Ckmem^ eftke CAmvi ef
England ^ they ceiPtainly take the ready Wjvf to
put our Magtftrates upoa the Dd>af Cj, whecfaar
they oughc to be mer^looEd ftitl.

'' '* »****»»« M nt n \0>*mmmmimmi^m)mm^fm'mmf^mm^^^^t^tmm^

ANSWER

IX

• • 1

. I : '■'■■

A N S W E R

TO THE

' - mT * .

« •

INTRODUGTION.

»• ■• . - ,

H £ R E is nothing Whereby a Man's
.Difpofirion and Temper of Mini! is
made more '. evident, than by his Stile
and M^iier of Writing ; fo that let a man. rake
"wh^ caution he can, or ufe never fo much Arc
(6 conceal his true Sentimeints. and natural Di*
i^Otion, yet the Pafiions of his Mind will by
fome means or other difcover themfelves> and
the Spirit and Soul of the Man will be reprefent^
cd in this Mirror: And if fo, then it will cer-
tainly be an undeniable Inflance of the real
Worth, the unafFeded Piety, the genuine Hu-
manity and Compofednefs of Mind, with which
the late ArchbiHiop o( Canterbury was endow'd j
that even his Controverfial Writings were pen'd
with fuch Smoothnefs of Stile, and Candor of
Expredion, and a generous Difdain of thofe mar
ny Calumnies and Reflexions which were con-
tinually caft upon him, not rendering Railing for
Rfiilin^^ jfUt xn^ijse contrary BleJIing ; and like the
$un, neglecting thofe Clamors which were oc-
caiioned only by his Height and Brightness:
And in this Clafs the Author of the True and

Mod^fi 4ccoHnt^ ^c. has plag d himfelf*

Foj?

Anfwer to the JntroduHiim. i ^

For if ever . any meet human Author wrote
V^ith Strength of Argument and DemonftratioiK
as well as Accuratenefs of Stile and Politeneb
of ExprefHon, it was certainly the late Arch-
bifhop o( Canterbury ; and yet the Author of the
True and MoJefi Account y &c. will allow him oiv^
ly the mean Commendation of an Ingeniom Per^
Jon : But, as he infmuates^ without any (bund
Sctik or folid Argumentation^ by which he be*
trays his own want of Capacity^ Learning and
good Senfe ; of which he has given us another
Inftance^ in the Judgment he pafles on the Di-
fpute between his Grace and Mr. Serjeant, who
(as he tells us) was fo^rf^^ a Wit, andfo indefa^
tigahle a Writer, and bj much fuferiour to the Inge-*
nisui Dr. Tillotfon : In Anfwer to which, I
ihall refer the Reader to the Preface to the Firff^
Volume of the Archbifliop's Sermons, where he
will find a full and iatisfadory Account of the
Controverfie between them, and plainly difco-
ver how little N. C. is to be depended on foe
bis Charader of Men, as well as his Judgment
of Controverfiesin Religion, and how trifling an
Author Mr. Serjeant is.

But to come nearer to the Point, he tells us
that his Defign,\n his Introdudion to his Book, is
to undermine thie Foundation upon which the
Archbifhop built all his Controverifial Writings
againft the Church oi Rome. This indeed was
a great and dangerous Defign, which if this Gj-
Uab had been able to accomplifli, he might have
fpar'd himfelf the labour of planting a formal
Battery againft the reft of his Arguments, and
writing his Book*

He .tells us, that the Archbifhop laid, down
(bis Pnodamental Principle ; Thox 'u;bat[ot'u^t>

1 4 di^mr n tht IrttroduBimi.

fism mU mjidmt n ^ur Smfes ^nd H^afony h t9 be
MkvJ^ t6$' aU tht Mmjmd Cistnbis m tie W^U
jfbmU ferfuaie ms n tie oantrMfy ; as that tiro tnd

nromite four: Aod «hus &r he owns him to
be in the iight3 m$ every Man of Senfe and Rea^
fen muft do ; cho' a ttttte «)fter he je pleas'd to
deny k in pig. ic^ where he ^^ers dns Autfao-
mjr of Tiadidoo even before the Evidence of
Senfey and fhppofes that tho' GWi Gw»dn^
UnU metfmit inu Mm't HMrt po ftll 4 Lie, yet iii
ffFiJdem nuty imtH Reafms n imfofi upon the Smfi4.
Bodt he £15^^ thtft £rom thtt FuniMmeHtd
Frmciffyy it doth not follow that this is ttie Pro-
eeftant s Gafe with regard to the Tapip $ no^ I
gnnt it doth not fotlow from thence^ nor did
&e ArchbiAop make fo filly an Inference:
But it doth neceflatily foNo^ from . this iup*
pofftion^ that if i^e Tenents of the Church of
Rime are contrary to Sen& and Reafon^ they
amft needs be falfe ; if they (hould teach that
two and two do not make four, but five^ or that
the Subfiance whiph I eat^ and which 4iiy Sen-^
fi» inform me is Bread, is not Bread, but ihe
Body of a Man^ that then they e$tght mt tc he hi*
UtOd, tbn* me^er fo tMiny Men &r Cturehert fi»duld cpm^
nni twithiT tc ti§rm tb^fe VfBpofitmi u he ttuu
And this is plain from hence^ becanfe Senfe and
Rea£>n are more certain Judges of Truth than
any Human Authority can be. The beft Man
in rheWorld may be deceived in his Opinions of
Things^ he may be biafs'd bv Prejudice and In*
tereft ^ Bodies of Men have oecn fo^ and Coun-
cils have err'd ; but Sen(e and Reafon are the
fureft Criterions of Truth ,• and upon their Tefti*
mony all the Certainty which we have ot Things
ll founded. To this W C anfwers, That if our

Senfea-

Anfwer t0 the InttoduSimL 1 5

$^&s and Reafon are to be credked before Ao-
thoJEity^ or Ancient Tradition^ that then the
Church oiR9me,zn(i fevcral other Churches^
have been in an jError for many Years3 ^ am-
ftaken in feveral Points of their Religion^ and
have introduced into their Church feveral Te-
DeQt$ contrary to tho Tefiimony of Senfe and
Reafon : And all this I readily grant^ nay,
that die R^msn Church was^ and ftill continues
fo much corrupted 5 that it requires the ut-
moft of our Charity to believe it a true, tho'
a very unfound part of the Catbolick Church
of Chrift, For as the Archbifliop tells us,
(Fol. 6. f. 261O ^^ It is not neceflary that
^^ the whole Chrifiian Church, or any narc of
'^ it, ibould be free from aU jErrors ana Cor-
^^ ruptions | even the Churches planted by the
^ Apofiles in the Primitive Times were not ib.
St^ Vml reproves feveral DoArines and Pra-
dices in t)ie Church of Corinth, and of Cah^
^^ and ofGdlatia} and the Spirit of God feveral
'^ things in the feven Churches of Afi^ } ^
^ yet all thefe were Parts and Members of the
^^ Catholick Church of Chrift, becaufe they a-
^^ greed in the main and effential Dodrines of
^' Cbriftianity ; And when more and greater
** Corruptions grew in the Church, the greater
^^ need there vi^as of a Reformation. And a$
*^ every particular Perfon has a right to Reform
any t;hing that he finds amifs in rdmfelf, (b far
as concerns himfelf j fo much more every
^5 Katipnal Church hath a Power within it
^^ (elf to Reform it felf from all Errors and Con^
ruptions : And whatever Part of the Churchy
how Great and Eminent foever, excludes fronp

€€

1 6 Anfwer to the tntnduBlon.

**• her Communioh fuch a National Church fof
-** Reforming her felffrom plain Errors and Cor-
•'^ ru prions, clearly condemn'd by the Word of
*' God, and by the Dodrine and PracSKce of
'" thePrimidVeChriftian Church, it is undoubt-
'* edly guilty of Schifm : And this is the Truth
*' of the Cafe between Us and the Church of

And in order to make Proof of this, I fhalf
confider : "

Firft, Tf^bat Arguments his Graa has made ufe cf
M the fever ai Heads. -

V 'Secondly, What N. C. has advancd in ahate-'
ment to the Force oftbewi

Thirdly , 1 Jhall endeavour to give a plain and
clear Anfiver to aU his ObjeBions ; whereby twill be^
tome evident to • every honeji and intelligent Reader^
that notwit branding all thofe nice Difitnclions which
have been lately invented to reconcile thofe Contradi"
Sions we charade upon the Church of KotriQ ; the Sdft-
nings which have been given to their Opinions ^ and
the Mifreprefentations which have been made ofthem^
contrary to their known PraBice, andtheSenfe of their
moft allow d Authors : Tet Popery is a Religion which
teaches DoSrines direBlj contrary to the Rtvelation of
the Holy Scriptures, the DiSates of Ri^ht Reafon^
and the Evidence of our Senfes * And ifjo^ that then
"no Tirfon can now continue in the Communion of the
Church c^Rome, without extreme hazard of his Sal' '
vation : And that fuch Proteftants who have been
once enlightned with the Knowledge of the
Truth, and yet renounce their Holy Fait by and turn
Papifts, ate guilty of a Sin of the deepefi Die^ and of
that Apoftacy which is near akin to the Sin againa
th^ Holy Ghoft.

THE

t '7 1

THE

Romarr Church not CdMic^

And of thd

Supremacy and Infallibility.

WHEN the Church o{ Rome^
which Was deftrvedly emi-
nent in the Times of the
Apoflles, and fonae fuc-
needing Ages , for the Soutidnefs of its'
^zah f and the Exemplary Lives of its
Profeflors, had by degrees in a long Trad:'
of Time (b far corrupted ideJf, as to be^
Cpme guilty of notorious Sdperftitibn and
Idolatry i then it: p)eafed God to raife up;
cnany Worthies';^ Men endowed With ani
Apofiolical Spirit ^ sind a Primitive Zeat.
for the Tfuth, who, with the hazard of all.
tjieir Worjdly IntereAs;, fet zhout that
Great and Glorioui iVork^ The Refoi-mingi^
the Churchy' and, redoring it to itsPrimi*
tive Purity and Holineft. . . _ «

, But as foon as (by the Blefling of
God ) our firft Reformers had made l^nie^
Progrefs inlt« aii4 it becani^ vL&ble loxVv^

L '8]

World, that there were many notorious
Errors, many Superftitious and Idolatrous
Pradices in the Church of Rome ♦ fuch as
could not be juftified either by Reafon or
Scripture; then thofe whofe Intereft in-
clined tbem to retain the(c Corruptions^
made it their Bufinefs either to defend
them by fomeplaufible Arguments, or at
leaft to palliate them by (ome frivolous
Excufes ;;and amongft thofe, the Ekx^'ine
of tbe tnfaltihlity of the^'Churc^ ^ was
efteem'd the main Prop by which Popery
was to be upheld and fopportqd.

For, i{ fhe Church caniiot err in deliiterhig
the DoSlrine /be receivd from fejus Chfifi^
nor mifiake in. her Epcphnation thereof; tlhen
(as they tell us} we have nothing elfe to
doi, but firft to inquire which is the "itrue
Church? -and fecondly, what this Chftrch
Teaches? and (without troubling our
felves farther about the particular Contro-
verfics of Religion) to takiS up our Faitfr
on Truft, and m down and believe whsrf*
(bevsr the Spiritual Guides of the Church
didate to us , and wc (hall be favU
Now,the P^pifis would have us be fb good'
qator'd as to take it for^^gyanted : •

^ iJ^hatthe Holy CathoKckGhurch^rfri^
conjifi only of fuch Memhers as are in €om^
munioH with the Church <?/ Rome,- and that
aU thofe -ho are excomttiunicated by;
it^ (which is the grciteft Part cAtW

''"■"■'-■ '^ Chriftiaii

C '9 ]

Chriftiari World 3 are no trne Member s
of the Cathdick Church , nor hare they
antj Poffibility of Obtaining Salvation :
Aria if we can once be brought to belieVfc
that the Church of Rotne is the only true
Church , then it will be natural to infer
from hence ;

Xi That the Topi is the Supream Head
of the Church.

3. That Infallibility is io ftrely lodged
in the Church of Rome y that whatfoever
that Church defines to be neceflary to be
believ*d^ ought to be aflented to by every
good Chriftianf, on Pain of Eternal Damns*
tion.

This at firft fight feetfis to be a (tioxt
and eafy Way of lending Controvcrfies,
and freeing Mens Minds from fuch Scru-
ples and Doiibts , as for the mofl part
perplex the moft fober and hoflefl Per-
fons i fuch as are bed difpofed , and have
the mod ferious (enfe of Religion. It
(eems indeed to be a plain and direct: Path
at the firft entrance , but when we are
gone on a little way in it, there will foon
appear fo many crooked Windings and
Turnings, that w^ flball be more perplexed
to find out the rijjht Way than we were
befoire. For,

I. It cannot b« made out^ that xbs
Church. of Rome i$ the catholick Cfeurcfe
Nor,

C 2<, ]

X. That the Ptpe is the Sopream Heaef
of the Church. Nor,

3. That there is any Infallibility lodg'd
in it : Byt the dircdt contrary is evident,
from thofe Arguments which ftis Grace ha^
urg'd in his Sermons.

I. That the Church of Rome is not the
Catholick Church he proves ;

I. Becaufe to affirm this, is to be
guilty of the fime Abfurdity , as to
fay y That a Part is the Whokj for the
Church of Rome is only a Particular F^art
of tte Oniver^I Church, aiid therefore
cannot be the Catholick or the Whole
Church.

To this N. C. anfwers , That by th6
Homan Church, the Papifts do not mean
the Diocefe of Rome^ which iri a (tric^fenfe
may be call'd the Church of Romei but all
Cphriftiari Churehes o\^er the World, iri
Communion with the Particular Church
or See oiRome , Dot as fubmittiiSg to its
Jurifdidion, but only as 'tis the Centre and
Frinciple of Catholick Vnify.

But 'tis evident , That this riot a triie
Reprefentation of the Matter of Fadt; iot
the Tapifts own no Other Members of the
Church of Rome^ but thofe who own the
Supremacy, and ftbmit theittfelVes to the
Authority and Jurifdidion of the Pdpe of
Rome. It being declared, in their Canotr
Law, neceflary to Saltation ^ thar every

flumane Creature (hould be ffabjed to the
Biilhop oiRome, And this is confirin'd by the
laft tateran Council. But fuppofing that
they do mean no more, becaufe H. C. tells
us (b; why then (hould they be fo fond of
this Appellation, Rom» Cathclick Churchy
Why ihquld not the Univerfal Cbriflian
Church do as well ? Why (hould they
ftudy to adorn the Church of Rom with Cq
many Glorious Titles, which do pot be-
long to her? The Church of Roffify we
grant, is an eminent Part of the Chrrfiian
Chur(h; bijit that this Part pan cpmpre-
hend the Whole , thajt we deny. For i|;
(foth ho where appear, nor are the Papifts
able to make it out, that the Church ofRom^
was inyefted with any peculiar Privileges
beyond other Chrtftian Cbifrcbes planted
by the Apoftles; or that (he was to be the
Mother and Miftrefs of aU other Churches,
For Jerujalm was certainly the Mother*
Church J there was ihe firft (!hriftiatf
Church planted , and from thence all
Chrtftian Churches in the World derive
themfelves. For if Rome was the Mother
9nd Mi{lre(s of all other Churches, 'twill
be difficult to account \yhy St Faul^ in z
long Epiftle to that Church, takes qo no-
tice of it: So that in 9II probability h^
was ignorant of thofe mighty Prerogative^
of the C^ifrci& <?/ Rome^ otherwife it caqno^
be imagin'^ but he would have wrltt^a

witli more defcrencetothtMotherXhurch^the
Centre of Unity, and Seat ofln fallibility j
where the Vicar oiChrifl was, by his Ap-
pointment, to fix his Throne, and e(tabli(h
bis Refidence.

But {ays Nl C, if you allow the Church
pf Rontf to be part of the Catholick Churchy
then 'tis certain, even to Demonftratioo,
that it mud be the whole Catholick Churchy
p. 99. but where to find this Demonftra-
tion ^ or any probable Argument to prove
^t, I cannot tell.

He tells us indeed, that one Faith and
one Communion are eflential to the Con^
llitution of the Catholick Church ; there-
fore thpfe who do not hold the fame
Faith, nor are in Communion with the
Church of Rome , are not Parts or true
Members of the Catholick Church.

I. But to this the Anfwer is very eafie,
that the fame Fundamental Articles of
faith, and the fame Sacraments and Offi-
ces of Religion are eflentially neceflary to
the Conftitution of the Catholick Church j
but it is not neceflary that all Parts of the
Catholick Church agree in every Point of
Religion, or maintain mutually external
Communion one with another^ For the
Church of Chrift may fall into many Er-
rors, and will have many Rents and Di-?
vifions, and one particular Church may

excommunicate another) and yet both flill

remain

[»J ]

remaifl Members of the Unlverfal Church.^
That Church indeed which retains the
greatefi Parity of Dodrine, and who(e
Con dilution is mod conformable to the
Practice of our Saviour and his ApoHles,
is the mod: found Member of the Catho^
Ikk church : But whacfbever Church
holds the Head^ and profe{{es the funda-
mental Points of the Chriftian Religloo,
and retains the fame Sacraments and Or-
dinances of Chrift ; that Church is a true
and real Member of the Catholick Churchy
tho' there may be many Errors or corrupt
Practices ^fiach as put Men in very great
hazard of their Salvation ) found in it,
and tho' it may not hold an external
Communion with all other Churches#
And if (b, then it will follow^ That other
Societies of Chriftian Churches^ who have
not external Communion with the Church of
Homey but are excommunicated by it, are
Parts of the Catholick Church ; and there-
fore the Church of /{^m^ comprehends on-
ly a part, and not the whole Church, as
will more evidently appear, becaufe,

X. The Churches of Ajia^ which were
£lccommunicated by the BiQiops o^ Rome^
for not keeping Uafter as they did; and
the Churches of 4^a and Africa^ pponthe
Point of Rebaptizing Hereticks, werehere^
by turn'd out of the Communion of the
ftofiifm Churchy and yet did (iill cpntinue

6 ^ V^

in the Communion of the QatboUck Church ;
which could riot poffibly be, if t\^ Roman
fOhurch and the CatboUck Church were the
fame.

This Argument K C tells us, is ground-
ed ilpon' a Fallacy, becaufe the Buhop 6f
Rovftt and the Roman Church are not the
fame J and whoever faid they were ? the
Biflbop of a Church and the Church over
which he is Bilhop, are certainly two ve-
ry different things. But is it not the fame
thing to be Excommunicated by the
Biihop of RomCy and to be ExcommMnica-
ted out of the Roman Church ? Arid if Ip^
theft the Catholick Church arid the Roman
'Church are not the famei nor of the like
Extent ; becaufe thofe who are Exconi-
ixlunicaked out of the Roman Churchy may
ttill remain' Menibers of the CatVolick or
Univerfal Chrifiian Church. ^

* 3; The Papifts themfelves hold. That
/the Baptifm bf Childreri by Hdretifks, is
good and valid, and makes them'Mem^
toers of the Catholick Church ; but Bap-
tifm confei^tl by aHeretitk doth riqt make
the Pefftfn Baptrz'd a Mefmber of the Ro^
man Churchy therefore the Catholick an&
the Roman Church are ndt the fame.
' To this Argument Nl C. anfwers, That
Paptilm confer'd by Hereticks is good in^
valid, and that fuch Perfons who arc bap-
' Xizd by therii, ^re made Meriibers of tne
^v :•. ' : '; ^'-^ ^' ' ' ■ •' fioman

•5 "«

jRoman Churchy unlefi tfaey caft tbemfelves
but bf the Church when they come to
Age by partaking of the fame Schifcn or
Herefie, and that even Hereticks receive
a true Charader of BaptUm ; but that
this Charadier doth not make them either
l^embers of the Catholick Cf^unpy nojr
avails any thing to their Salvation.

In which Aolwcr, Two Things will be
very difficult to be made our. Firfi^ How
a Pried, who do^h not own the Church of
]gime, but looks upon it a^ a $uperftiti*
bus and Idolatrous Church, ^nd that 'tii;
not lawful to Communicate with it^ and
by being Excommunicated is become like
a Heathen or Infidel, can make another
a Member of that Church to which he
pears no Relation ; 'tis an old Axiom^
ffemo Jat $J^uoJ non baief, that no' Maa
can give that which he is not podefs-d of;
and if a Heretipk is not a Member of the
Church of Rem^ how can he make ano-
ther Co i BeHdes, to the due Adminiftra-
tion of the Sacraments, the Pafifts hold
the In ten flop of the Prieft abfblutejy ne-
ccflary ; this is declared by the Council of
Xrfnt^ with an Anathema upon all who
lay otherwife^ Sefflj. Can. ii. So that
if the Prieft doth not intend to Baptize,
the Perfon doth not receive Baptifm, noi
is made a 'Member of Chrift*s Church :
Now ^tis certain, tfiat thoft the PaoiftS

• » ' *■:.•.. '■ I . -i : ' ■ . ■» *

C "5]

call Hereticks do not intend to Baptize
into the Roman Churchy how then can their
Baptifin make them Members of that
Church ? Secondly^ If the Adminifiration
of fiaptifm doth confer even upon Here-^
ticks a true Charader of Baptilm^ why
fliould it not make them Members of the
CatloiUk Chunk f For , what is this
true Charader which is confer'd by Bap*
tifhii but an Adual Admiflion of them in-
to the Church of Chrift.

4. If the Roman Church were the fame
with the Catholick Churchy then all thofe
Churches who do not yield Subjedion to
the Bilhop of Rome^ nor acknowledge his
Supremacy, are not true Parts of the Ca-
fholkk churchy and by confequence have
no poffibility of being fav'd j but fince
this is the Condition of the Greeks and
Eaftern Churches^ as well as of the Pro.
teftants ( four of the five Patriarchal
Churches of the Chriftian World) we have
good reafbn to believe that God will be
more merciful than our Brethren. of the
Church otl^Cy and that the Catholick
Church doth extend farther, and hath lar-
ger Bounds than the Roman.

This Argument If. C grants is founded
on a very great Inconveniency ; and (b
great, that every good Man will be very
apt to conclude, both from the GoodneHf
and Merpifulqefs of God's Nature, that he

will

C »7 3

will not damn fo great a Multitude of
Men, only becaufe they are Anathama-
ti%d by the Biflbop of Rome , efpecially
fmce N. C. has formerly told us , That
they may be Excommunicated by the
Bilhop or Rome^ and yet remain Mem*
bers of the Catholick Church^ H. C. in-
deed is very pofitive, that they cannot be
(av'd, , and tells us 'tis the Opinion ci
the Romi/b Church j but from this uncha*
ricable Judgment of theirs, we have good
reafon to infer, That the Church of Rowe
is fo far from being the whole Catbolick
Churchy that it is only a very arrogant and
uncharitable part of it.

5. If the Roman Church was the fame
with the Catholick Churchy then it would
have been thus exprefs'd in the Ancient
Creeds, becaufe it is of fo great impor-
tance to the Salvation of Mens Souls, and
the Peace and Unity of the Church, that
it would not have been omitted. But we
do not find any Foot-fteps of this Expref-
fion; nor is this Phrafe The Holy Catho^
Ikk Church thus explained in the firfl Ages
of the Church. And ^neas Sylvius Cwho
was afterwards Pope*) tells us, that be^
fore the Council of Nw, little refpecSi
was had to tht Roman Church ; 'tis true,
his Grace remarks , that this was faid
before JEneas Sylvius was Pop?, but that
'twas never the left t^rue for all that.

To this M.C. aofwers, That tho' the
words Rowan Catholick Church are not tq
be found in the Ancient Creeds, yet the
thing meant by thefe words is there, be-
caufe Roman Catholick Church and Holy
Catholick Church do denote the fame thing,
and are Words of the fame iniportance :
But this is a (hameful begging of the
Queftion; for the thing in difpute is,
V/hethcr the Catholick Church in the Creed
,jj^- is the ifame with the Roman Church ? and
hcczwCe jyi C. pannot prove it, he is pleasM
to fuppofe it Such arguirtg as this he
learn'd from his Friend Mr. Serjeant.
If a Rule is a Rule, then a Rule is a
Rule. And the Roman Church is the fame
fame with the Catholick Churchy therefore
the Roman is the Catholick Church. As tc^
the Authority of JKneas Sylvius , Vf. C.
tells us, That the words of ^neas Syl*
vius relate only to the DioceCe of Rome.
^* For Cfays he} I arp fure he never
*' faid or writ, that the Romifb Churchy
** as it includes all the Chrijlian thurcbes
** in Communion with the See of Roine^
** Qn which fenfe the E)o(3:or could not
** be ignorant we always take it) wa?
^^ not the true Cqtholick Qhurcb.

In which words he plainly contradids
himfelf, for he tells us that the Papiftsall
ways take the Roman Church for all €hri^
fiian Churches in domrhunion with the

Church

L 19 3

Church of Rvm^ and in no other fenfe ;
and yet in the fame breath he gives us
another fenfe of the words , and tells us
that Mneas Sylvius meant them only of
the Diocefe of KomC' But let us fuppofe
that JEneas Sylvius did (peak of the Dio-
cefe of Rome. What, then, certainly it
mufl; from thence follow, that if little Re^
fpe(3 was had to the Diocefe of Rctne be*
fore the Council of ifice^ therefore 'tis
not likely that by the Roman church the
Catholick Church was denoted, the Roman
Church being only a fmall, and no remar*
kable part of it

As to that Quotation but of Irendus^
tvhereby he endeavours to weaken the
Authority of Mncas Sylvius^ to wit, That
every Church mull have recourfe to this^
by reafbn of her more powerful Princi-
()afity. The words plainly relate to the
Civil Government, and prove that the
See of Rome had no Advantage over
. thofe Sees which were placed in other Ci-
ties, from any Power derived from Chriflf
which was purefy Spiritual ; but only be-
caufe the Civil Power had plac'd there its
Refidence and Tribunal-

Laftly, The Roman Church is not the
Catholick Church\ becaufe our Saviour ne-.
yer conftituted St. Teter and his Succef-
fors fupream Head and Pador of the
whole Ch/iftiafi Church. Which brlcies ma

\

to the ^cond Poiat in debate, to pfove,

X. That the Pope is not the Supreant
Head of the Cburch.

If. G tells us, that the Pope or Bijbop of
Rome is the Succejfor of St. Peter, ank as
fuchyis the Head of the Church ; i.e. not only
the Centre of Catholick Unity ^ as he (bme-
. tiroes explains it; but alfo by Divine
Appoiatmeat , the Supream and l/niverfal
Paftor of the Chrifiian Church ; to whofe
Jurifclidion every Humane Creature mu(!
be (iibjed, on Pain of Eternal Damnation/

This is an unfufferable Branch of
the Papal Ufurpation^ over all Chriftian
Churches in the World, without the lead
Ground or Colour of Ground, either from
Scripture or Antiquity j and may and has
been extended, to a Temporal Power over
all Princes and Magiftrates , under the
fubtle Pretence of Ading in order to Spi^
ritual Ends.

But that the Biihop of Rome^ as SucceC
for of St. Peter , cannot be the Supream
and Uhiverfal Paftor of Chrift s Church, thq
Archbifhop proves j

I. Becaufe there is not the lead men^^
tion of this in Scripture, (i.e.) That
St. Peter was the Supream and Univerfal
Paftor of Chrift's Church.

z. Suppofing this , yet it doth not
thence neceffarily follow, that this Power
fbould be derived down from St. Peter to
the Pope of Rome. \ -Tk^t^

I . There i^ not the teaft mentioiv in Scri-
ptA^re 6f St F^f /s being the Sapream anJ
Ujfiv€rfal?aftoroi Chrius Church; there
is not the leait Intimatt'ion of any fiich
thing in the Gofptly or the A^$ and EpiflUt
of the Apoflles ; nay, there is ctear Evi-
dence to the contrary, that in the Council
at ferufalem^ St. James was, if not fupertor^
yet at lead equal to him; and S^ Paul
withfi&ad him t9 the Pa^e^ ind plainly a(l
ferts the Equality df his own Authority
wirh bis*

To this If. C ahfwers, That \h troe,^
that the Scriptures tnafre no mention of
this Title, Supream and Univerfal Pa ft or ^
in exprefs Words , yet the Arcfabifliop haa
no reaJOH to fnarrel wkh them% becaufe
there is nothing more meant by thenb, but
that the Tope is Headoj the Churxb.

But this is meer trifling ; for 'tfs not the
Words or Title of Supnam and Ukiterfat
Fa/tor^ which the Arebbiftop difllfces, but
the Thing intended by them ; arid dfcnies^
that St. Veter was this SUpream and Uni^
verfal Paftor; or that the Stripttij^e givcs^
any Intimation that he was the ififtW of
the Church: Soth^ what he (ays of the
word Confubftantial in the Nicefte Council,
is nothing^t all to^thePurpofe, •

But be tells us , that there are Texts
of Scripture which iprove clearly, that
St. Peter was cenftituted by C\\n^ &«i-

jreat»

[ jO.

^ndm Head of the Church ; he e[uotes
Matth. 1 6. 18; I fay unto thee^ thou art
Peter Qor as the Greek has it, a Rocky
and upon this Rock will I huild my Chirch f
As, alfo that our Saviour (aid unto him,
1 Johmi.1^^16. Feed m^ Lamhs ^ and
feed my Sheep j by the one he will have
the People defign'd, by the other the Pa-
yors of the Church. And Luke xx. 3 1 , 3 x.
When thou art Converted , Jlringthen or
confirm thy Brethren^ Thefe Texts of
Scripture Qit concludes^ miift needs de>»
note (bme particular. Mark or Charader
iroprefs'd upon S(. ttter^ and fome Au-
thprijty and Jurifdidion veiled in him:
above the reft of the Apofiles.

This is eaftly (aid indeed, but not (b
(pon proved j for *tis evident, that there
is nothing here (aid to St Teter^ but what
is applicable to all the reft of the Apo-
ftles ; they are all enjoin'd to feed God^i
Lamhs and God's Sheep ; both the (Irong
and the weak in Faith ,* they are <all ex-
horted to confirm and flrengthen one ano^
ther J and there is fo little Umbrage ia
the Holy Scripture of any Superiority
given to one above the reft, that our Sa^
viour gives the Mother of Zehedees Chil-
dren a fevere Check , for nj^aking^ this;
Requeft, that her Sons might fit the one on
the right Hand^ and the other on his left^-

in his Kingdom r This certainly had been

a fit*

[jj,]

i fit opportunity for our Siviour to dd^
tlare to whom this Right did belongs'
but he blames their Ambition and Arro-i
^ancj^, and tells theni plainly, that he
who would be upperrtioft Ihould be a *
Servant to the reft^

But becauft the Pap'ifts tfraw the molf
plaufible Arguments, anfd rely chiefly for
the Proof 6f St: Peters Supremacy frona
that Text, Matth. i6. i8. Thou art fe-
ieit^ and upon this Rock I will huild tny

Church : I will therefore cofifrder ft mote
particularly. , ,

And, Firji^ This Promife of oiir Sa-
viour to St. Peter^ is generally thought
to rehte to St. Peter's Confeffion; for
Wh6n our Saviour asked his Difciples^'
But whom fay ye thai 1 dm ? ver. i y,
Piter immediately anfwered , , ThoU dti,
Chrifi the Son of the hiving Codi ^ And^
fefus anfwered and f aid unto hini^ Blejfed
art thou Simon Barjona , fc^r Flejb and
Blood hath not revedlei if unto thee^ hut,
my Father ttohich is in Heaven : And /
Jay ufitd thee^ Thdu aft Peter^ (J. e. thy
Name fignifies a Stone); and upon that
great and fuflfdaniental Truth which thoii:
h«ft made Confeifion of, (^viz. that I ani
Chrifi, the Son of the living God) 1 wilt
Build my Churchy and the Gates of Hell (hall
trot prevail againft it ; L e. againft that
Churclt, which by the Miniftty o5 Si. te-

Ufi

L ?4 J

ter^ and the reft of the Apofiles, was tar
be built upon this Fundamental Article of
Faith ; and that this is the true meaning
of the Words, will be more clear by com-p
paring them with Epbef. z. 19. where the
fanie Metaphor of a Building is made ufe
of 9 to which the Church is compat'd,
and the Apoftles and Prophets to the
Foundation , Jejus Chrifi himfelf to the
chief Corner fiwe.

But fuppore thcfe Words were ^oke to
St. Peter himftlf, all that can be infer-d
from it is, That Chrift would fb build
iiis Church i>pon that Apoftle, that he
fljould have the Honour ofl^iying its Foun-^
dation,both aoiongft the Jews and amongik
the 6ej$tiles ; not that he jhould be the
Supream Head and Governour of it whe»
built, which can never with any (hew of
Heafon, be implyM in the Promifc of
Chrift of huilding his Church upon tkix
Rock; for 'tis evident that none of the.
Apoftles hot St. Peter hitnfelf did under-,
ftand this Promife of any Primacy pf .
Power or Jurifdidion; becaufe after our
Saviour had faid thefe Words, and after
they hid received the Lffufion ot the Ho-
ly Ghofl, which led them into all Trutht
and inipir'd them with the full Under-
flanding of Cbrift's Words ; they, did not
bc-ieve tbcie was any fuca Pnmacy gi*.
vcn lo St. Peter above the refi of the.-

Apoitles;^

Apoftles, but contended who (hould b6
greateft.

Secondly^ He argues, that the EvMge^
litis repeating the Names of the Twelve
Apbftles, place St. ftttr firft, and partu
cularly mark his Supremacy. Ni?» the
i^ames of the Tivehe Apojlles are thtfe^ tht
fir ft Simofiywho is caUedFeter ; and thencfc
N. c. concludes, that there could be no
other Reafbn why he was nam'd firft (^be-
ing he was neither the firft DiCbiple who
was caird, nor the oldeft Man) but be-
caufe the Supremacy v;as Vefted in him;
and adds, that tnoft certainly Chrift did
not defigh the ^fSr^ Pifcps^ thofe
words, firji Peter^ for a Primacy of Cere-
mony and Civility, but for that of Ordet
and Jurifdidon.

But where the Strength of this Argu^
ment lies (which he utters with fo much
confidence) I cannot find ; for, how doth
it follow, That becaufe St. Peter was
nam'd firft, therefore he had the Rule
and JuriOidion over the reft of the Apo*
fties ? The utmoft that can be concluded
from the naming St. Peter in the firft
place, is j that he had the Precedency of
the reft of the Apoftles, for Tome Reafon
or other ,• but what that Reafon vvas, is
not hereby determined. But in truth, we
cannot conclude from hence Co much as
this J for tho' Su Peter is here namd ^vcft.^

C % ^^\ i

C %6 ] •

yet he is not always fo, for Gal. %. ^. he
is nam'd in the (econd place.

3* But N. C. infifts farther, That after
Ghrift's Afcenfion, Su Teter adually took
upon himfelf the Charadef of Supream
Head of the Church j and this he endea-
vours to prove from the Fitft oi the A^f^
where St. Peter flood up, and difcours'd
at large df the Fall of judaa : z. When
he gave an account of the Gift of
Tongues : 3. When he rarade his Defence
before the Rulers : 4. When he paflecf
Sentence upon Ananias and Saphira^ but
efpecially by what he did in that famous^
Council of the ^potties, chap.i$.

Thefe fnftances irideed prove St. fetef
to be an Eminent Apoiflile^ but do not
give us the leaft hint of his Superiority or
Jurifdidion over the reft of the Apoftles i
for in the Council at Jerujalem^ St. James
wasyif not fuperior,^ at Jeaft e^ual to him ;.
and St. Paul tiim^lF telfs us, That he
withftood him to the Face , that St. Pe-
ter gave him the right filand of Fellow
(hip ; and we are told, Ails 8. 14. Thisit
St. F^f^r and- St. John were Tent by the
Apoftles, who= were at Jerufalem^ to Sama-
ria^ which gives no encouragement to the
notion of St. Peters Supremacy.

To this N". C. replies, ^ That tis true
" St^ Paul was equalto St. Peter ^ and fo is
f every iiifliopto the Pop^i but thatthisr

CJ7]

^^ equdlty doth confiftonly in tlie Power
** of Preaching the Word, of Adminiftring
^' the Sacraments, and of conferring Holy
** Orders , but that the fupream Govern-
" ment of the Church was entirely lodg'd
^^ in St. Peter. This he fays indeed, but
how doth he prove it > Why, after his
nfiial manner, by taking it for granted,
without affording us the ieaft ih^dow of
Rea(pn for it.

But fince he thinks fit to take it for
granted, we will psty (b much deference
to him for the prefent, as to do (6 too,
and fuppofe that St Peter wfis Bifliop o|
Rome, and fupream Head of the Church.
But then he willbe hard put to it to
prove , that he tranfinitted his Suprf
macy to his Succellbrs, and to his Suc-
ceflors at Rome ^ rather than tq. thofe at
Autiochy where 'tis evident that he wa?
firft Bifhop , but not that he was ever
Biftiop of Rome. For, if Sr, Peter de-
volved his Supremacy upon his immediate
Succeflbr, and that it is felfevident by
the Law of Nature, that Heirs and Sucr-
ceflors inherit the Privileges of their An^
cefTors, as he tel]s us, pag. lox. then his
immediate Succeflbr at Antioch^ where he
was firft Bifliop, muft be the Supream Head
and Paftor of the Church i and then the Su-
premacy will be lodgd in the Church of
'^ntfochy and not in the See of Rome^

[ ?« ]

To this N. C. anOirers , That 'tis true,
that the Holy Scripture, no where de-
clares, that Sl Peters Supremaiyy was de-
rived down to his Succeffor at Rome , and
that it was not neceflary it ihould be fo
declar'd ; becaufe the Power and Author
rity of a Biihop naturally devolves upon
his Sttccedbr ; and with his ufual Modc^
fty and Civility tells us, " That this
" Queftion of His Grace ( viz. Where doe?
*^ it appear in Scripture , that Sr, Titers
** Power was derived to his Succeflbrs ?3
^^ is one of the rimpleO; ExprelTions tbac
^^ ever fell from a Man of his Parts ; and
^' and that he is almoft unwilling to bo*
^^ nour it with a Confutation. But fincc
be acknowledges His Grace to be an Inge^
mom Terfon^ znd^zMan of ? arts ^ I am apt
to think he had j[bme good Reafon for.
what he faidj tho' a Man of /f.C/s Parts
^nd Ingenuity cannot prefently apprehend
it. Now fmce there are three forts oi
Supremacy i z Supremacy oi Worth, Order,
and Jurildidion ; why may not St. Peters
Supremacy be the firft and fecond of thefe?
Which being founded on Perfbnal Merit,
doth not naturally flow to the immediate
Succeflbr ? That it was To, is more thaa
probable , becaufe there is not the lead
Footftep of zny Supremacy of Jurifcii<Stioa
lodg'd in St. Pet cry either in the Holy
Writ, or in any of (;he Aqtient Monuments

of

Ii9l

of the Church for the firft five Centuries ;
and when the Title of Univerfal Eifbop
was ufurp'd by the Patriarch ot Conftan^
tin$pk^ in the end of the fixth Century, it
was look'd upon as new and profane
Titte. But the Archbifliop asks another
Queftion i Why,C(upporing that,S. Peters
Supremacy did defcend to his immediate
Succeflbr) the Supremacy (hould be fix'd
to the See of Rome ? Beciule 'tis uncer-
tain whether St. Peter was ever Biftop of
Rome; and if we grant that too , yet 'tis
evident that he was firft BiQiop of /in^
tioch : And when the Papifts themfelves
Confefs, that St Peter rais'd two Epifcopal
$ets^ the firft at Antioch^ the other at Rome^
why (hduld iW Power and Jurifdid:ion
be entail'd upon the See of Rome^ and none
defcend to his immediate Succeflbr at An^
tioch? This Objedlion If.C. took no*»
tice of, but is not pleas'd to honour it with
an Anfwer.

And now fince the Miflionaries of the
Church of Rome make ufe of this Sove-
reignty and Supremacy of the Tope^ to
ptove the Infallibility of his Perfon ; by
fhewing how little Reafon there is to fub^
fnit to his Supremacy^ the way is levelVl
and prepared in order to attack that great
Bulioark of Popery , the Infallibility ; and

jto fl|ew,That neither the Pope^ nor church

C 4 of

C 40 ]

of Rom^ are Infallible. And this the Arch-*
bilhop proves;

I, Becaufe the Vapifis 2lxq qot agreed
amongft themfelves, where this hfaSibi.
fitj is ftated » whether in the P^^^ alone,
or a Council alon^, or in both together, ot
in the diffufive Body of Chriftians ; and
we cannot judge it reafbnable that the
Chriftians in all Ages did believe it, and
had conftant recourfe to it , for determi-
ning their Differences ; and yet that That
yery Church, which hath enjoy'd and us'd
it fo long , (hpuld now be at a lofs where
^o find it ; nothing could have fall-n out
pore unluckily, than that there fhpuld be
fuch Differences amongft them, about that
which they pretend to be the only Me^ns
pf ending all Differencejf

To this N. C/s Anfwer is (b fingular,
that I fhall tranfcribe it for the u(e of the
Jleader. *' Fpr my own Part, ((ays he}
■^ I never yet read , or heard of any Ca^^
*' tholick Divine, that ever faid. That the
*^ CathoHck Church, tafc:en for the Diffu^
^^ five Body cf Chrijlians^ was not infaH^^
•^ hie in declaring Matters of Faith; there*
^^ fore, I think, all agree, that the tnfqlli^
^' hility is (eated in the diffufive Body of
f Chrijlians f And I challenge any Pro*
*' tejlant in the World to name me one^
' whp fays the contrary. The Pope 19
■' one, 8od thQ chief Member of that bif-

» • » o

cc

t40

^^ fufive Body. The Pope^ and Councii tor
^^ gether, make a great many Members;
f^ and if you add to thefe all the reft of
f^ the Faithful , they make up the entire
** Diffufive Body of Chrifiians.^ If the Pope
*.* be infallihle^ furely the concurrence of i
V Council will rather confirm than dimi-
■ * ni(h his Infallthiltty ; ' if the Pope and
Council together be infallihle , the Gon-
(ent of the Diffufive Body of Chriftians
^ ^ muft furely flrengthen and confirm it ;
but if neither the Pope^ nor the Council
alone be infallihle , the Diffufive Body of
Chrifiians muft neceflarily be; if any
^^ fuch thing as Infallilility may be aicrib'd
-* to any of the Three, feeing both PQpe
*' and Council are included in it. We are
** fure then, the hfalliiility conCx^s at
" lead in the Diffufive Body oj Chriftians.
^^ But to illufirate this a little more, let
f^ us propofe this familiar Example. Iff
** (hould ask where my Lord Mayor of
" London is, at this time? And that
*^ fonje (hould tell me, he is in his own
*' Houfe ; others, not in his own Houfe,
*' but fome where in London; and others,
^* neither in his own Houfe , nor in Lon^
f' don^h\xx. in England : I would willing-
" ly know, whether thefe three Cons of
*.' People do not all agree that my Lord
If Mayor is in England i Certainly they
u do } becaufe the Aflent .of the two

C40

^^ former is necefTarily implied id the
" latter.

^Ma like manner , tho' (bme fay tte
** P^^^ is infallible i others , not the ?vpt
•* alone, but together with a General Cdun--
** c//} and others, neither P^j^ ti or Cair;fc//
•* alone, without the Concurrence of the
** Diffufive Body of Chrifliani j yet all d6
•* concentre in this , that the Diffujive
'' B^dy of Chriftians is infallihk. The
*' Dodor is then very much out , when
• * he fays ; Thej do not know where it », tho
** they are fure they have it.

*• In (hort, the Article of Faith, dearly
^^ known, and unanimoudy aHented to by
" all Roman Catholicks ^ in regard of Infal'^
** lilility^ is only this : (viz.) That the
*' HolyGhoft, the Spirit of Truth, by the
^y Promife of Chrifl^ in all Ages refides itt
** the Catholick Church; infallibly declares
" and explains ,• by the Paftors of thd
^' Church aflembled in General Council^
" and united to their Head, all Chriftiatt
" Verities. In this great Principle of
•' Faith, all Roman Catholicks with A(^
" furance and univerfal Concord agree;
** and herein confifts the whole Notion of
^' what Roman Catholicks mean by the
•^ Term Infallible.

And I think , whoever reads this An-
fiver, muft conclude from thence, that the!
fapifts are npt agreed araoogft themfeives^

wher?

C4J ]

where this Infallihility is featedj There^
fore they Jo not know mere it is. 'Tis a plain
Queftion we demand of the Tapirs. If
there is appointed by Chrift an infallille
Judge, to decide all Controverfies which
(hall arifenbout the Chriflian Faith , Who
is he^ and where we may addrefs our
(elves unto him ? To this N. C. anfwers^.
•* That he never yet read or heard of any
** Catbolick Divine^ that ever (aid, that the
** Catholick Churchy taken for the Diffufiye
•* BoJj ofCbriftians was not infallille^ in de»
** daring Matters of Faith- Well then, all
the Catholick Divines are agreed, that the
Jnfallilility doth refide in thfc Diffufive
Body of ChrifiianT; and we have nothing
elfe to do, but to prove, That the Diffiu
five Body of Chriflians cannot be infallible
Judges and Determiners of Controverfies;
which I think is no difficult matter to
perform, becaufe they never did , nor can
ipeet together , nor did they ever deter-
mine any one Controverfie.

But perhaps his meaning may be , that
the Diffufive Botiy of Chriflians is infalliilei
not as taken perlonally, but as reprefented
'* in a General Council^ of which the Pope is
•* the Head ; and that the Holy Ghoft infal^
^* liily declares and explains by the Pallors
**of the Church aflembled in a General
^^ Council^ and united to their Head, all
j^'Chriftian Verities. But: this doth notagreo

C 44 1

'* with what he has told us, That to mat*
^ up the diffufivcBoJy of Chriflians ^not only
** a General C<?^»ci/ united to their Head,but
** all the reft of the Faithful are requirU
** And that feveral of the Topifh Divines are
** of Opinion, That a General Council with
" the Tope at their Head is not infaBihle^
^^ without the concurrence of the difj^ujive
** Bo^ of Chrijiians : And how to recon-
cile thefe Inconfiftenpes, I know not ,* and
till they jre reconciJ'd , I muft affirm ,
that not only the Papijis in general, but
-A^. C. in particular, thoVhe may be never
fo confident that the Roman Church is /»-
fallible , knows not wj|ere to find this
Infallibility , jnd then 'twill be oP no
ufe to him j and if 'tis of no u(e, I am
very inclinable to think there is no fucfa
thing. And as for this Inftance of the
Lord May or J it labours with this Fallacy ^
That firft he fuppofes fuch a Magiftrate
in Being ; and then he would prove from
hence, that he muft be fomewhere ; hull
the thing in difpute is, whether there is
an InfaUihle Judge, or no? and if he is
not to be met with any where, 'tis very
reafbnable to conclude th^re is no fuch
jPerfon. There are (everal other Hints in
, this Paragraph which are very dark and
myfterious, and I (hould be very glad to
have them explained, and to know how
Infallihilitj can be ftrgngthned, and made

L45]

tiiore certain ,• for if it can be fo, I am
ape to think, that the InfaOihility the fa-
pifts boafl (b much of, will fall fbort of
that Moral Certainty we Trote^ants arc
contented withall ; Or, what ufe he in-
tended to make of that irrefragable De-
monflration ; '*Thatfuppofing InfaUilility
" is either in the Vofje^ or Council^ or the
*' Mffufive Body of Cbriftians ; that if ii is
not in either of the two firft, it mufine*^
ceflirily be in the lad. But leaving thole
Trifles, the Archbi(hop argues ;

i« That the Church of Rome Is not in^
fallible^ becaufe there is not the lead tn-^
timation in Scripture of this Privilege
confer'dupon it. The Apofiles in all their
Epijlles do not give the lead diredion ta
Chridians to appeal to the Bifbop of Rome
ibr a determination of the many DifTeren-*
ces, which even in thofe Times hapned
among them ; Nay, on the contrary,
there are (hrewd intimations given, thae
the Church of Rome her felf fliould Apo-
ftatize from that Faith,and that her Haugh-
tinefs would be her Ruine, Rom. 11. lo,
%i . where fpeaking of the^ ^evos who were
broken off by their Unbelief, he gives
this Caution to the Church oiRome ; fPell^
becaufe of Unbeliefs they were broken offy ana
thou ftanJefi by Faith. Be not higb^mindeJ^
but fear. For^ i^ God f pared not the natu-^
pal Branches y take heed leji he alfo ffar^ not

C 4<5 ]

thee. Be mt high-minded^ hut fear. What
need they to fear^ who bad the Privilege
of InfaOiUlity > Their Faith muft needs
be unfliaken •• But St. "Paul (eems to think
that Church to be in as much danger of
falling from the Faith as any other. Nei-
ther do the Ancient Fathers in their Di-
fputes mth Hereticks , appeal to this
Judge, tho* it was fo ihort and expedite
a way of ending Controverfies. And this
very Confideration to a Wife Man, is in-
flead of a thoufand Arguments, to fatisHe
him that in thofe Times no fuch thing
was believed in the World.

To this N. C. anfwers, That thofe
** Texts of Scripture which prove the Ro^
^ man Church to be the Catholic k Churchy
** prove alfb the Infallibility of the Churchy
*^ but thofe have been already accounted
** for : Then he affirms, That the Ancient
Fathers did appeal to this Judge,and quotes
a Sentence out of St* Aujlin^ which is no.
thing to this purpofe ; the Father fays.
That he (heuld not he lieve the Gofpel^
hut that the Authority of the Church moves
him to it ; the true meaning of which is,
That *tis by the Authority of the Churchy
that we judge what Books are Canonical^
and what not ; and that the true Books
are diftinguiih'd from the fpurious, by the
Church giving Teflimony that they were
the genuine Books, written in thofe

[47]

Times^ by thofe Perfbns who(e l^fames
they bear ; and then he remits the Reader
to Tertullian^ St. 4(^liin^ Epipb^nms^ but
quotes nothing out of them, which he
would certainly have done Cbeing is very
liberal of his Quotations out of the Fa*
thers^ if the cafe were (b plain as ho
pretends.

3. The ArchbiAop argues farther, that
we may as well expedl an InjallihU Judge
ill T^m^%\ Matters as in Spiritual, The
ground of this Argument is this, The
P4;>(/?j in defence of their Infallihtlity urge,
that an hfallthle Judge is necefTary, be-
caufe otherwife every particular Man
would be left to judge for himfelf ; and
if every Man ihould judge forbimfelf,
there would be nothiilg but confufion in
Religion, there would be no end of Con-,
troverfiesjt fb that an Univerial, UfaUi^
^Judge is neceffary; and without this,
Qo^ had not made fu^cient ProviAon for
the alSurance of Mens Faith, and for the
Peace and Unity of his Church, or as 'tis .
expre^s'd in the Canon Law^ Aliter D^m^
nus mm viJeretur fuijfe Jifiretus^ other-
wife our Lord had not feem'd to be dif-
creet.

To this his Grace anfwers. That 'tis high
Prefumption in Men to fay, God fhould
do thus or thus ; but they ought rather to
confider what he has done, and to lay their

[48]

Mouths in the Duft , and to admire ibe
Wifclom of his Doings.

Secmndlj^ That if this Argument ha J
any (enfe in if, it would prove that thertf
6ught to be an InfaOille Judge ftt over
OS in Temporal Matters as well as Sf>iri-
tual, becaufe the one is as necedary to the^
Peace of the World, as the other to the*
Peace of the Church; and that Men are
every whit as* apt to be perverfe al>ouif
Matters of Tern pioral Rigtity a$ about MzU
Urs of Faith.
To this tJ. d; replies, * That this Life
is a State of Trial, and that we muft^^/r
thro much Tribulation into the Kingdom of
God; and therefore God permits the
Cruelty of Tyi'ants to try the Patience
of Martyrs, and fuffers the Oppreffioj^ of
(he Poor on Earth, to enhance thei/Rc-
ward in Heaven ; (b that the Cruelty or
Errors of a Temporal Judge do rather
increafe, than dimitiilb the Happineis of
the Jufl: : But that the Cafe is far other-
wife in Spiritual Matters ; if the Judge
(hould fpoil us of our Faith, or errinjudg[-
ing for us, it would caufe 6ur eternaf
Ruin, our Damnation being nceeflarily
confequent upon a falfe Belief. And for
that Reafon, the Goodnefs of God feems
to be fomuch the more engag'd tofecure
the Spiritual, than the Temporal Judge
I from Error. ' V

C 4? ]

Tri which Reply, N. C is guilty of feve-:
ral grofs Miftakes ; for, Firfi^ he (uppofes
that every Man mud rely upon the ]udg-
tijeot of fome Spiritual Judge, add that
his Salvation depends upon the Certainty
of this his Judgment ; but this we Fnti^
ft ants deny, and think that God has much
better provided for us, by giving every
one liberty to judge for himfelf. And,
Secondly^ he miftakes the Archbifhop's Ar-
gument, which is only levelVd againft
that idle pretence of the Papifts^ That 'tis
very convenient tbdt there fhould he fuch
an Infallible Judge of Controverfies : To
which his Grace replies. That 'tis a high
Prefumption in Man to think, that God
piuft do whatfoever he fancies convenient.-
And, Thirdly, it (eems much more conve-
nient that there (hould be no InfaOihle
Judge, becaufe if we were infaUihly cer-
tain of the Articles of our Faith, our A(^
lent to them would be no Virtue, and we
ibould lofe that Bleffing which is pronoun-
ced on thofe yfoho have not feen^ and yet h€^
litve^ becaufe we fliould be more certain
than if we had (een them. N. C. fays
farther j That Chrift threatens eternal
Damnation to all thofe who will not be-
lieve his Dodlrine, which cannot ftand
with his infinite Goodnefs, unlefs he had
provided injaUihle Means of conveying
the Truth of this Doftrine to them.

C 50 r .

Whereas his Grace has often told them,
and particukrly in his Preface to his Firfi
P^otume of Sermons , That there may be
fuch Evidence as no Wife Man may have
reafbn to queftion, tho' there (hould be no
InfaOihilitj at all; and therefore when we
have fuch a Moral Affurance of the Truth
of thefe Articles of our Faith which are
propos'd to us, we have good reafon to
be content with this Evidence, and to
give our full Aflent to it.

Fourthly , His Grace argues , That
an Infallihle Judge, if there were one, is
no certain way to end Controverfies, and
and topreferve the Unity of the Church;
unlefs it were likewife infalJibiy certain,
that there is fuch a Judge, and who he is.
For till Men are fure of both thefe, there
will fill! be a Contioverfie, Who the
Infallihle Judge is, and where to find him.
And if it be true which they tell us,
That without an Infallihle Judge Controvert
fies can never he ended^ then a Controver-
fie concerning an hJalUhle Judge can ne^-
ver be ended.

/ To this N. C. anfwers, That he has al-
ready proved both, that there is an InfaL
////^ Judge, and who this Infallihle )udge
is.

But, F/r/?, How has he proved that
there is an Infallihle Judge } He pretends
to prove it from Reafon, and Scripture,

and

and the Fathers ; and herein he appeals
to the Senfe and Reafbn of every private
Perfon in this great Fundamental Article
of the fopifl) Faith ; but this Appeal is
contrary to that Principle of the Papijls^
That an Infallthle Judge is necejfary to decide
allControverfies in Religion. But fays //. C
we appeal to the Churchy which is an In*
fallible Judge; and the Church tells us,
both that there is an Infallible Judge, and
that the Church is that Infallible Judge :
But this is to fuppoie the thing in Con«
trowQi^i^^ not to prove it j and be/ides^
fince they are not agreed amongfi them-
felves what they mean by that Churchy
which is to be the Infallible Judge of all
Controverfies, 'tis evident, that this Con-
troverfie can never be ended till they find
out fome other Infallible Judge to decide
it. Let them therefore firft agree amongft
themfelves what they mean by that
Church , which is to be the Infallible
Judge of Controverfies, whether the Vope^
or the Tope in Council^ or the Tope in Coun^
cily together with the diffufive Body ofChri^
ftians; before they fend us to this Churchy
to have our Differences decided by it.

Fifthly^ The Archbifliop argues. That
if God had thought it neceflary that there
fliould be an Infallible Church , in the
Communion whereof every Man may be
fecur'd from the dangers of a wrong Be-

lief, he would have revealed this very
thing more plainly than any particular
Point of Faith whaiCbcver. He would
have told us exprefly, and in the plained
terms, that he had appointed an Infalli*
He Guide and Judge in Matters of Faith,
and would have likewife as plainly told
us who he was, and where we might find
him, and have recourfe to him on all
occafions.

To this N. C. anfwers. That the 5^/-
nUns may retort this Argument upon us,
and fay, ^ That if God had thought the

* knowledge of the three Perfons really di-

* (Itnd, each of them perfedi God, and yet

* but one God, neceflTary to be believe by

* the Faithful, he would have revealed this

* very thing more plainly than any par-

* ticular Point whatfbcver, becaufe it is

* look'd upon to be the chiefeft My fiery of

* Chriftianity.

But here If. C. is miftaken in fcveral
Particulars. For all that we are oblig'd
to aflent to in the My fiery of the Trinity^
which is neceflary to Salvation , is as
plainly reveal'd in the Holy Scriptures
as the Matter will bear, and that it is not
more plainly reveafd is only owing to
the Weaknefs of our Intellect:, which in
this Life is not capable of comprehending
it ; plain Truths are plainly revealed in
the Holy Scripture, but Myfteries only fo

far

[5}]

far as they have an Influence upon our
Pradlice, and after all the Explications of
them, they will remain myfierious ftill.
Thus we are told in the Holy Scripture,
that there is One God, and Three diftind
Perfbns in the Godhead ; becau(e this is
neceflary to underftand the Oeconomy of
our Salvation, and the different Opera^
tions of the Godhead in the Wonderful
Work of Man's Redemption : But the
Manner of the Subfiftence of the Trinity ^ is
fiill a Myftery^ and will continue fo, tiU
Faith jball end in Vifion: Nay 'tis vety
quedionable, whether in Heaven itielf we
fiiall be capable of comprehending it. And
therefore fmce this is one of the mofl Ado*
rable Myfleries in Chriftianity , there is
no Reafbn why we (hould endeavour to
comprehend the Manner of it ; but very
good Reafon why we (hould not. But
the Dodrine of the InfalUlility is of a
diflferent nature i for the End of confii-
tuting an infallihk Judge mufl: be, To
determine (uchControverfies as arife about
Religious Matters. Now, this End is
wholly evacuated , unlefs it evidently ap-
pears not only that there is fuch a Judge,
but who this Judge is ; nay unlefs there is
fuch a plain Revelation of it, that even
Schifinaticks and Hereticks may be infallibly
convinced who this Judge is ; For fmce
if. Q. defines the Church to confift only

of fuch Members who agree in one Faith,
there is no need of ftch a Judge for thofe
who are already agreed , but only for
thofe that differ; and as he tells us be-
fore, when the Faith is violated ly Schifma-
ticks and Hereticks. Tis therefore a fuffi-
cient pround of our Anient to this Article
of our Faith ; That in the Godhead there
is a Trinity in Unity , to prove from Scri-
pture, that every diftindl Perfbn is God,
and that yet there is but one God j and
we ought to be content to be ignorant of
the Manner how it is (b; tho' 'tis but rca-
fonable that many other Truths in the;
Holy Scriptures (hould be more fully ex-
plained to us, becaufe they lie more level
to our Capacities and Underftandings.

As to thofe Textsof Scriptures which he
inftances in, and tells us, that they plaii()ly
prove, that the Church is infaOiile; they
are nothing at all to the purpofe, but prove
rather the dired contrary-

The Firft is, TeS the Churchy and if he
ivill not hear the Church , let him he to thee
as a Heathen or Fuhlican ^ Matth. i8. i6,
17. But this Text plainly relates to fuch
Private Injuries as arife between Man and
Man, and dire<St us how to compofethem,
and right our felves , without return-
ing or revenging them ; as wiJI plainly
appear , by confidering the Scope of the

Plack

Ll5l

Place , and the Coherence of the Words,
with thofe which went before.

John 1. 13. fVben he the Spirit of Truth
Cometh^ he will guide you into all Truth ; this
Fromife is evidently made to the Apoftles
only, who were infallthly guided into all
Truth : But if we fliould grant that it
was made to the whole Church , it doth
not follow, the Church IhouLd always
be infallille ; no more than it follows,
that we (hould be defended from all
Sia ; becaufe we have a Promife of being
Jed into all Good.

Matth. i8- xo. Lo I am with you always^
to the enA of the World ; and i Tim. 3 15.
The Pillar and Ground of Truth ; the firft
mentions nothing of the Church's Infalli^
hiltty^ and doth not prove any fuch thing j
for God may many ways aflift and diredt
his Church, without making it infallille:
The other is a Metaphorical Expreffion,
and too weak a Foundation to buijd any
Dodrine upon , efpecially that weighty
Point of the Infallilility.

I have been the fhorter in my Explica-
tion of thefe Texts of Scripture , becaufe
'tis contrary to the Principles which the
Fapifts hold , to found this Dodrine upon
the Authority of the Holy Scripture:
For as * His Grace tells us , They hold,
^ that the Infallibility of the Church mufl
I firft be known and proved, before we can

P 4 iv\\\u

[58 1

Frailty of our Condition is (uch, that we
have no infallible Security again ft Sin and
Vice ; fo neither is there any againft Er-
ror. It is fufScient, that in both refpe(%s
he hath done that which is fufficient to
make us capable of Happinefs , if we are
not wanting to our (elves ; The reft he
hath left to the Sincerity of our Endear
vours ; expediting that we , on our Part
Ihould voork out our Salvation with fear and
tremlUng^ and give all diligence to make our
Calling and EleSionfure.

Laftly , Since all things neceflary, ei-
ther in Faith or Pradicje, are clearly and
plainly revealed in the Holy Scripture ;
therefore there is no need of an Infallible
Church. This is (b plainly proved in the
four firft Sermons of the third Volume of
the Archbifliop's Sermons , (edit.pofl ob.)
that N. C. doth not think fit to fay any
thing in Confutation of it; but only tells
us,that in eftabliftiing this Principle^which
as he truly fays, is the Fundamental Prin-
ciple of ProteJiantSy and can never be
niov*d by all the Papifts in the World)
the Archbifliop does two things , he
would not willingly allow of: That Firft,
He makes any Man of fenfe, who caa
read the Scripture , as infallible as the
whole Catholick Church Q he means the
Roman) pretends to be. Secondly, He

juftifies in ^ great liieaftrei all tlie fifretickt

thai

C59]

that ever denied any Points of Faith i on
Pretence that they are not plain Scri-
pture. This is indeed a heavy Charge,
Jet us fee how he maintains it. Firft, He
fays , the Archbifliop makes any Man of
ifenfe , that can read the Scripture, as In^
fa^llihle as the whole Gathohck Church Ql. e.
the Church of Rome) pretends to be. For,

* (ays he, the Catholick Church pretends

* only to be Infallihle in neceflary Articles

* of Faitbf Now if all things neceflary to

* be known in Faith and Pra(9:ice,be clear
*and plain in Scripture; then there is no

* Man of fenfe that reads it, but may be
^as infallihle in what is clear and plain, as

* any Church or Churches in the World 2
^ For what is clear and plain to a Man, he is

* as (lire and certain of, as if all the Mathe-

* maticians in the World had demonftrated

* it unto him.So that this worthy and grave

* Dodor neceflarily vefls in every Private
^ Man that InfalUhility^ which he endea-

* yours with (b much earneftnefs to deny

* to the whole Catholick Church.

Thus N. C. argues, or rather he makes
ufeof (b many wilful Prevarications, that
there is hardly one Sentence, that doth
not include (bme Falfity in it. For fays
he, the Catholick Church only pretends to
be infallible in the neceflary Articles of
Faith i but is there any fuch Limitation
4s ibis in the pefinitiori of Mallibilit\ ^

Doth he not fay, That the Church cannot
err in Delivering the DoRrines (he received
from Chrifit nor miftake in the Explanation
of it ? And will he (ay, that by Dodrines
he means only (uch as are ab(blutely neced
(ary to Salvation ; fuch as are contained
in the written Word of God > And
doth he not know , that the Rowan
Church lays claim to a Power of de-
claring what Doctrines are neceflary^
and what not? And fo can call what
Doctrines (he pleafes Neceflary, the* of
never fo little Importance , as many of
thofe Twelve Articles are, which the Fope
has added to the Apoftles Creed; as alfo
that he lays claim to a power of Ex-
plaining all thofe Articles ; whereby many
New Tenents are introduced into the
Church,^ and declared to be abfblutely ne-
ceflary to be believ'd in order to Eternal
$alvation> which have no manner of Foun-
dation in this Holy Writ. %dly^ He can»
not be ignorant that the Archbiihop means
9 Moral Ajfurance^ and not an Ahfolute In*
fallibility ; becaufe he has declared it (b
plainly in many of his Sermons, and in-
culcated it fo often; and yet N.C. is re*
folved to miftake his Meaning , and to
affirm , That the Archbifliop places the
fame Infallilility in every Private Perfon,
V^hich the Fapifti affirm to bq vefted in

the

the Church of Rome. Whereas the His Grace
only fays, that every Private Perfon, by
theconflant atid diligent Study of the Holy
Scripture, may attain to (b much Know*
ledge, as may inform him what he ought to
believe, and what he ought to do ; and (iif*
(ice to lead him unto Life Everlaftiog. }dij^
He cannot but know that we may have a
Moral Certainty of many things^ for which
we have no Demonflration : All thefe
things //. C. could not be ignorant of, tho^
he was refolved to (hut his Eyes, and feem
not to apprehend them. By which we
may fee, what Shifts thofe Perfons are put
to, who have undertaken to lay falfe Co-
lours upon a bad Caufe, and to place their
counterfeit Wares in a falfe Lighti in or-
der to put them off to fbme unwary or
unskilful Chapman.

a« He fays, the Archbifliop juftifies alt
Hereticks that ever deny'd any Points of
Faith, on pretence that they are not plain
in Scripture ; and particularly he inflan-
cesin the Socinians^ who, he tells us, have
got the better of the froteftants^ and beat
them at their own Weapons*

But firfl 'tis evident, that N. C. is no
competent Judge which has got the bet*
ter, becaufe he doth not pretend to be a
Judge of the meaning of thofe Texts of
Scripture which give occafion to the Dif-
putes. Nor doth the Abufe of the Holy

Scriptures put in any Bar againft the ufe
of them ; Mens Lulls, and Paflions, and
Prejudices, will blind their Underftand-
ings, and clap a Bia(s upon their Judg-
ments : And tho' the Truths of Religi-
on are never fb plain, and clearly revealed
to them, yet will not they afford them
their Alfent : Thofe Men who will not
pradticd thole Duties, which are evident
even by the Light of Nature, will mifap-
ply the plained Texts of Scripture, when
they deliver any thing contrary to their
corrupt Inclination. But this is not the
fault of the Rule, but of the Men who
mifapply it ,• who would continue the
fame Infidels or Hereticks, tho' they had
an Infallihle Judge to dictate to theni ? for
we find, there were never more Herefies
than in the Times of the Apoftles; and
yet 'tis confefs'd on all hands, that they
were endow'd with an Infallible Spirit.

I might add a great deal more on this
Argument, but 1 fear I have dwelt too
long on it already ; and therefore I muft
defire the Reader,who is not fatisfied with
what is here faid, to review the Arch-
bifhop's Sermons, where he will find ma-
ny more excellent Arguments to the fame
purpofe. 1 (hall fum up all with an inge-
niousApologue, from the 99th Page of the
Third Folume of Sermons.

I will

I will conclude ^fays his Grace) with a
a very plain and familiar Cafe, by which
it will appear what Credit and Authority
is fv- to be given to a Guide ^ and what not.
Suppofe I came a Stranger into En^land^
and landing at Dover^ took a Guide there
to condudt me in my way to Tork^ which
I know before by the Map to lie North of
Dover ; having committed my felftohim,
if he led me for two or three days toge-
ther out of the plain Road, and many
times over Hedge and Ditch^ I cannot
but think it (Irange, that in a civil and
well* inhabited Country, there (hould be
no High Ways from one part of it to ano-
ther : Yet thus far 1 (ubmit to him, tho*
not without (bmc regret and impatience.
But then if after this, for two or three
days more he led me diredly Souths and
with my Face full upon the Sun at Noon-
day, and at lafl bring me back again to
Dover Peer, and ftill bid me follow him j
then certainly no Modefty doth oblige a
Man not to difpute with his Guide^ and
to tell him,{urely chat can be no Way, be-,
cauft it is Sea. Now tho' he fet never (b
bold a Face upon the Matter, and tell me
with all the Gravity and Authority in the
World, That it is not the Sea, but dry
Land, under the Species and Appearance of
Water; and that whatever my Eyes tell
me, having once committed my felf to

his (juidance |t mud not trufl my own Sen-
fes in the cafe ; it being one of the mofl
dangerous forts of Infidelity for a Man to
believe his own Eyes,rather than his faith-
ful and infallible Guide t All this moves
tne not ; but I begin to expoftulate round-
ly with him, and to let him underftand^
that if I mud not believe what I fee, he
is like to be of no farther ufe to me, be-
eaufe I (hall not be able at this rate to
know whether I have a Guide, and whe*
ther I follow him or not. In ihort, I tell
him plainly, that when I took him for
my Guide, I did not take him to tell me
the difference between North and Sduthi
between a Hedge and a High-lVay^ be-
tween Sea and dry Land ; all this I knew
before, as well as he or any Man^ el(e
could tell me ; but I took him to condud:
me the dirctftefl way to fork : And there-
fore, after all hi« impertinent Talk, after
all his Motives of Credibility to perfuade
me to believe him, and all his confident
Sayings, which he gravely calls Demon-
(Irations, I (larid (lifly upon the Shoar,
and leave my Learned and Reverend Guide
to take his own courfe, and to difpofe of
himfelf as he pleafeth, but firmly refolv'd
not to follow him : And is any Man to
be blamd who treats with bis Guide on
thefe Terms?

And

And this is truly the cafe 9 W&eri i
Man commits himfcif to the Gmdanti of
any Perfbri of Churcli j if by Virtue of
this Authority, they will needs perfuade
me o^t of my Senfes, and not to believd
what I fee, but whit they fty, that Viit^
tue is Viccy and Vice Virtui, if thiy de^
tlare theni U he fo i And that becaifl%
they fay they afe JnfallihU^ I am to re-
ceive all their Didates iot Oratlesi thd^
never fb evidently falfe and abfiird in thd
Judgment of all Mankind. In this igaf0
there is no way to be rid of thefe uflred^
fbnable F'^iople, but to defife of thenij
iince one Kindneifs defervei another, and
^11 Contradidions ^re alike eafie to te beU
liev'd, that they would be pleafed to be-s
Iteve, that Infidelity is Fs^itb ; and that
When I abfolutely renounce theif Atfthou
fity, I do yield i mod perfed Submiifiori
iffid Obedience to it.

«r.i.-;;^^ ■-..•,. ..- ,■ ,. :.y ^ ,,>.,v ^ ^

fe Of

166 1

Of Tranfuhjiantiatiotti

WHAT t|j? F^0i hoW to be of
Faith ppnqerniog th|« Pqm ,
lf,Q. teH «s, ifthis, "Th« ^h? wh«k
** ^ftgflce of tbfi &r?ad ^fld Wine, isi %ftp|
** ConftfiTftiofi, qbsjngd into, tl?e iprfy
*VfiB^ BloQd ofChrift, wiphput ^uy .al,
** .iPE«ion of tb? Aojidents or put\jfwcf
*• ¥9mh

A^ioft this impious aijd {^hfttr^ T§t
ee^t, iff G^Jftf b»$ vefy fr^queftUy, alii
akng bjs ^ermw? , taljeo <?^,r? ?p :%ifl«
his Hear?r:S^ «nd h?g writ 4 juft Xr?«iti^.
9a4 inftfted, it in| His 7>ir</ f^/ifj?i<r of ^r^

wyjifi to, prove thftt tkis Do^rin? of 7><i%
SfkhfimtiMoit \§ flMfe^Iy contrary to" Seqfii
and Rea(bn, and the cotampn Notions jq|
Mankind j and that it lias no Reyelation
to uphold it, nor was it ever thought off
in the firft and pureft Ages of the Church,
and that 'tis chiefly upheld by the inte-
reft of the Roman Cier^, and the uncom<
mc ailiirance of thofe who aflert'it ; and
thio iie has perform'd with that Strength
of Argument ^ and Plainnefs and Clear-
nef^ of Stile, which was natural to him j
anu a Iiich has in a great meafure exhauft-
ed ti ? SubjeiJ^.

T6 the Archbifliop^s Arguments, tf. C
pretends to return an Anfwer, and with
feme flie«»^ tif Reafbn and Philofophy, and
Qtiotflition^diit of the Fathers and the Ho^
ly Scripture ; and ^as ufually^ is very
pofitive in his AflTertions ; tho* in truth,
he doth iHit nibble an Argument, and
fays little to the purpofe j fo that ibofe
ftrong ReafoHS which his Grace has hroughi
forthy (^iikie an Arch'd Building) ftand
more firrti and fibcure for the weak Efforts
he has nlade argaind them. And therefore,
tho^ the bare reading over the Arch-^
biftopTs Treatife, by any intelligent and
welt difposM Perfon , would be a fuifici'^
cnt Aniwer to /^. C '$ Cavils ; yet fince
he has made u(e of (bme mtemperd Mor^
tar^ to repair the Ruins, and All up the
Chinks of this myfteridus Edifice (as he
calls it) and labours to prop up the rot^
ten Materials and vifible Decays of thisi
totttrm^ Fabrick i I ihali therefore take
the pain^ to confider what be has to (ay
On this Subjeca*.

And, Firll, NIC begins with a heatry
Complaint againft the Archbifliop , for
treating the Papifts with fcurrilous and
abufiye Language! but does it in fuch
terms , that no orfc would ever have
thought that U. C. and the Author of
the True and Modeft Account , were the
fam* Perfon; iot tho' Hh Grate ^oxH

I

(bm^times expofe the FoUies of the Church
cf Rome^ and is pteafant at fuch timesi
when the Matter doth not require a (e«
riotis Anfwen Bat as Horace advifes^

,-^- — — Ridiculum acri
t^ortius & melius maffias fkrunque Ji^
eat res.

Yet he never departs from that becoming
and good-natur'd Gravity, which was in
a peculiar manner his Charader and Or*
nament. And therefore N. C has only
exposed himfelfy when be begins his Dif^
courie with this infipid Harangue, which
I (hall tranfcribe, to give the Reader a
tafte of his Sincerity and Temper^

*' Never, fays be, iJ^iwjir Conqueror
** fiing more Paans after Vidlory, nor in-
** fuhed over Ws Enemy* with more
*' Oftentaticn, than Dr. Tillotfon has, on
•* this Subjed, over the Roman Catholicks

and the Church oj Rome ; and Cto com-
^* pleat the Parallel ) if his railing Elo-
^ quence and unchridian Contumelies
** {} am forry he extorts ftch Words from
** me} w^re of equal force to bind, with
^' that of Roman Chains^ no barbarous
^ Captives were ever worfe us'd by their
^^ infulting Conquerors, than the Sons of
** that Mother, whole Piety and Zieal,
*^ l>/aogbc forth kiChrift, bis Ancedors,

<c

^ have the foriipne to be treated by the
^ unchrifiian Slanders and Calumnies of
^^ bis bitter Tongue and Pen. Beftdes
** that invincible Argument (if we believe
•* him ) that Achilles , the Evidence of
** Senje^ which he pretends to be againft
^ this Myftery, and which he repeats
** over and over, in more places of his
^^ Sermons than [ can at prefent reckon %
^^ he has oblig'd us with a Treatife writ-
^^ ten on purpoCe upon this Subject,
** which he calls a Difiourfe againfi Tran^
^^ fuhflantiation: In this Piece I meet
^' with as copious a Coiledion of (curri-
'^ lous, injurious Language, of notorious
^' and manifold Impofitions, and (b much
^ Difingenuity in citing of Authors, and
^' managing their Authorities, as I be«
*^ iieve, was ever poifible for any Man^
*^ who had never fo little efteem for his
^* Credit, to bring within (b narrow a
^ compaft,

This is fo heavy a Charge, and of fo
venemous a Nature,confidering the Crimes
objei^d, and the Dignity and Worth of
the Perfon, againft whom it is levelfd,
thatif 1^. C. cannot make plain proof of
it) he mud pa(s amongft all Men of comt
mon Honefty and Senfe, for a bare*fac'd
and infamous Calumniator. I (hould be
;lad he had any thing to fay to excufe
linifelf^ an() flipyk) have had the charity

[ 7.^ ]

t0 believe^ that Ze^l for the greit Dian^
of the Topifh Religion^ or Paflion which
is hren)U Furor^ might h^ve tranfported
him into thefe Indeceacies, and occafion'd
the casing up (o tnuch Dirt and Filth up-
on his Superiours ; but that he taL^s care
to inform his Reader^ that h? was calm
^nd (erene when he wrote it v 9pd h ns
fajfton : And therefore he h^s the more
to anfwer for, and ought himfelf to con*
fider what hie (o frequently admoniih^s the
Archbiflbop pf, Tl^t be mfi (bortlj givi an
^iicouftt at (jo4's TrihumL

Well then, if he is To much {lis own
Man, we m^y expert, that he will make
his Charge gopd, »n4 produce thefe
^eighty Reafans^ and ju(lifie th? Demon-
iirations he fQ frequi^tly^ glories iq^ Eiut
fo far is he from |hls , or making $ny
Proof of thdt which he has fo confidently
^flerted, that hp doth not go about it ; but
contents himftlf , to gull the Reader wjth
that idle Excufe, That ^t prefent he has
pther bufmeft : Well, Ijqwever he ^akes
care to ;inform us^^ th^t tho* he jja?
now other Employment upon his hands
pf greater import^nc^, yet he will find a
tiipe to fall the Ajphbi(hop to account,
and ant'vHf r his PooJ, Paragraph by Para-
graph; an^ to give. us « Sample of his
tended WorK, he «(illfif>^l9 oijthisiniain
Obje^iopi aqd fwftte \h^U /

Now

I 7. 3

Now N.C.tells Mi^thzt the mainObje<9ioflr
againd Tranfuhflantiation is, That 'tis con-
trary to Common Senfe , aAd the Reafbn
of Mankind ; he nitght have added , tts
the Revelation of the Holy Scripture, arid
the Pradice of the Primitive Church ; fo(r
all this Hii Grace htfs made out^ andfuffir.^
ciently proved in that Excellent Treatife.
And firft the His Grace fays, the Do-
drine of TranfuhftaHtiation is coijtrary to
the Evidence of dur Senfes •• " But, Csyi
" N. C. this he only (ays , and repeat*,
^' but never makes tht leaft offer to pf ove
^^ it ; he would hdVe us , it ftems , take
** it for granted ; For without this , I
^* believe, nay I afn fure, he did not well
** know how to go about td prove h;
To ()rove what ) Why, that That which I
fie, and feef, and fnielt to be Bread in
the Sacrament is certainly Bre^ad^ and n6i
fkibj or tb^ Body di a Man. Afid then ha
goes On i; ^^ Anfd 'tis a thing I dftert ad-^
** ffiir'd, with how much Confidence thfe
^ Good Man and btlfers, would prefs
** this Argument Q of Believing otr Sen-
^* fes) upon us , without offering i!he
** leaift Proof of in And this items the
^ more flrarigc ; bccaufe that the more
f * evident any thing is» as they pretcn(J
^* this to* be, the eafief 'tis to find Me-
^ diunts to prove it. But neither he, nof
?* $11 the philoibphcrs that ever were ,

P4 '*^^

[ 7-^ ]

^f or are to come , flMH ever be 9ble to
^* make one good Argument, to^rovc
^^ th^t Tranfuiftantiathn is Gontradi<^d
^* by Scnfe. To which I fliall only reply.
That as there are fome things lo dear^
that 'tis a very difficult matter to prove
them } Co there are fome Objedions Co
impertinent , that 'tis a yery hard matter
to anfwer them.

For what thinks he of Self-evident
Principles, are they not To clear and plain,
that they neither want, nor can have any
Medium to prove them by ? Doth not
every one belieVe a Rule is a Rule , and
faith is Faithy without proving it ? If not,
let him go about it; but I fear he will
meet with the fame Succefs his Friend
Mr. Serjeant had. For did he never hear
of a certain Philofbpher, who when his
Opponent denied there was any fuch
thing as Motion , took qo other way tq
confute him , but only Walking about i
And truly 'tis my Opinion,that That Man
who denys the Evidence of Senfe, ancj
would have it prov'd^that he fees, or feels,
deferyes only the Argumentum Baculinum. *

But as he goes on .- " What is Trati-
^* fuhfiantiatim i Why the Change of one
*f Subfta nee into anomer. Of what fenfe

* then is Subftancc , the Object , that
f • luch a Change raaybt? difcover'd by it?

* ■ ^ Jis of nq Seftfe fpre, but qf the tJndef-

C7jD

^^ ftandiflg, as all the World knows. Hour
^ can that then contradict fenfe , which
^' is not the object of any (en(e; fmce no
f^ Faculty can be employed , but about its
** proper Object > They might as well
^' tell us, that Colours contradict the
^^ (enfe of Hearing, or Sounds thefenfe of
** Seeing. Good God ! what trifling is
here .> I am tired with tranfcribing it.

I (hall not therefore enter into the de-
tail of all his Miftakes and Mi(repre(enta.
tions , nor will I give him the trouble of
telling me what he means by Colours
contradiding the Sen(e of Hearing, or
Sound the Sen(e of Seeing , for then I
fliould never have done ; but I Ihall only
take notice of (uch as are material
And,

Firfi ^ Tranfulflantiation is not the
Change of one Subftance into another,
for this we allow to be poflible ; but 'tis
(uch a Change, in which the Subflance is
altered , and yet the Accidents remain,
which we hold to be altogether impolTible :
For where-ever the proper Accidents of
any numerical Subftance is, there that
numerical Subflance muft bt; Accidents
are only the different Shapes apd Modes of
Material Beings, and have no manner of
Exigence diflinct from the Bodies iti
which they inhere^ The Underftandin^

jndec^ caqf §bftra<i| t^l^c <w^ fforo the

[74]
other^ bat 'tis impoflfible they (bodid bSv6
any diftiad adu&l exiftence 9 'tis as tai^
{K^ible to (eparate the roundftefs, and
hardaefs^ and blacktiefs of one Numerical
Body, arid apply ft to anofth@r; as that
the (ame Body fbould be hard and ibft^
white and black, at the (atii^ time^ Md itf
Ithe fame refpect.

Seccmdly^ 'Tis evident, that Subilance \4
the remote, tbo' not the immediattrObje^
of Sciifc ; (i. ^.) OOT Sfnfei dd judge of
tte Suhfiames of things, by the per ception
of iboTe proper Accidents which beloHg
CO them; anid there is no othtfr tvay of
knowing the change of a Subftance*^ but
t^ the evidence of Seitfe, dtfcoverirfg thM
cnange of xh^Aceidiuti which 6q beloftg
%o that Numerical Subftance. And there-
f(Mt our Knowledge concerniffg afiy ^ar-
ticular Subftance y mtrft be derived froffif
file Report of the Senfts : For by what
Means can we tell, that this is a Book,,
and that a Stone, that this is a Loaf,
and' that a piece of Fleffi, but by the
lodgment of the Senfts? For ftould
any Man give me a Stotie> and affirm^
Day £wear to me 'twas Bread ; yet I
flrould ntVer ; beHeve him, but confide
rather in the Teftimony of my owtf
Senfts J becaufe where^ever there is ari
Aheratiim x)f the Subftance, thrire muft
iiceds be aa Alw»ic» (tf tl^e A^pidcnts
/ . ' ' * cr

C7J]

6t outward Forms. A piece of Bread
may be turn'd into Fleih , but then 'tis
impoifible it Chould retain the outward
Form, and the fanie Symetrv of Parts ; for
then it would not.be Flelb, but Bread *{lill;
the change of the Subfiance necedarily
implying the change of the Accidents
alfb. For Extension is by the Papifts al-
lowed to be an Accident of the Bread ;
but if after the Bread is tranfubftantiated^
all the Accidents of the Bread remain,
then the Body and Blood of Chriil mud be
ipxtended in the Sacrament ^ but this the
Ftf//y?f will not allow ; becaufe they hold
that the Body of Chrift is prefent.in the
Sacrament, not corporallyt but fpiritually.
But farther, 'tis evident , that there is no
other way to diftinguiib between Fleih
and Bread, but by their different Appear,
ances to the external Senfex whereby 'tis
i^vident, that they have a cliiSerent Difpo*
fttton of Parts ; For if things might be
fubflantiaJIy changM » and yet the (ame
Accidents , Appearances and Obje(3:s of
Senfe remain ; there could be no fuch
thing as Certainty in the World , there
could be no way to diAinguilh one thing
from another; to know an Egg from an
Elephant, or a Mu(quet-BuUet from a
Pike.' And if fo, what would become of
die main Proof of the Cbriflian Religio»y
flfflpi . ^iragles^ Hpw coujd the 4poJiles

be

foe Witaefles of the Refurre(9:ion of our
Blefled Saviour j when they knew not with
what Body he rofe, or whether he had
any real Body or no ? In fhort, there is
nothing more big of monftrous Abfurdi-
tieS| than the Doftrine of Tranfuhfiantia^
tipH; and tho' the Papi/li may endeaveur
to difguife it , and coin new and fubtil
Diftindions, with never fd much Art, to
keep the Learned in Play , and to m
upon the Unlearned ^nd Ignorant $
that they may (ay (omething when prefil
tho' in truth they have nothing at all to
fay to the Purpofe / Yet the World be-
gins to difcover the Impoflure , and to be
lenfible of the Weaknefs of thefe frivolous
Evafions , and this Doctrine will be the
MiiI-Stone,hung about the Necif of Fopcry^
which will fink it at the laft.

But fays N. C. ** Granting all you have
*' have (aid to be true, yet it proves no
^^ more, than that ordinarily and for the
** moft part, the matter is \o : But why
*' may not God notwithftanding this, dq
^^ otherwife upon Extraordinary Occa*
^* fions, efpccialiy in Myfteries of Faith,
^* which are not fiibject to the Ordinary
^^ Rules of Nature ? And why may not
** we believe J that the Accidents of
^' Bread exhibit another Subftance to us t
^* efpecially fince we have the Word ot
fj the Son of Qod for i( 9 8S well as th9

Accidents of a Dove 9 and the Appedf^
^^ ance of Men could reprefent the Holy
^^ Gfaoft, and the Angels to St. fobfi the
^ Bapttft i and to tot. ^ohn the Baptift
^^ (aw in appearance a Doye defeend, and
^^ remain upon Chrift ; yet he believed it
^^ was not a real Dove ; . becaufe he wa$
^^ told by him who f(?nt him (God) that
^^ it was the Holy Crholl » that was to
^^ defcend , and remain upon him. And
^^ why may we not believe the (ame God,
^^ when he tells us , that that which ap^
f ^ pears to us to be Bread^ is his Body, ^C4

And here our Author confefles inge-
nuouflyt that we ought always to give
credit to our Senies, except in fiich ca«
ies where God tells us, that we muft not
f;ive credit to them ; and (b the determi-
nation of this Controverfie will devolve
upon this Point ; Whether God has ever
told us, that we mud not believe our Sen«
(es ; which I have good reafbn to deny^
becaufe 1 cannot be certain that any fuch
Revelation is from God, but by the Te*
fiimony and Evidence of my Senfes. Let
us conGder the Revelation of the Chri^
ilian Religion; doth not the Proof of the
Truth of this ^e.veIation depend upon the
Belief of the Refiirredion of our Blefled
Saviotir > And this Belief depends upon
the Teftimopy of the Apoftles, and their
^fAimony upon the Evidences of Stv\(^4

tor iincc thdre is an infinitely wi^
tnd good Being, who firH made, tind
ftin governs 40d prcfeiv'es' the W6rl4>
he will not ftiffef his poor Creature^
to wander in the Dark, but will giyij
them fufficicht means to come to the
Knowledge ' of the Truth , and purfue
the End bf their Beings j he dired* all
Ranks of Creatures according to the na-
tnre of rficir Beings, Stones by the Laws
of Motion, fenfitive Beings by Inttin&i
rational by Reafon, which depends on
thofe Ndtices taken in by the Senfe So
that the lafl: Appeal both of Reafon and
Revelation is to Senfe ; We arc a^tit''3
that there is fuch a Book as the Biilgy
hf our SenTes, and Vis by the reading
or hearing of it that we come to the
knowledge of what is written in it ;
And therefore , if there fhould be any
Ittii in Scripaire which fecms to con*
tradicft the plain Evidence of Senfe , I
Ihould be very diligent in enquiring in-
to thv meaning of it, and wary in re-
ceiving any other Interpretation', but
what is agreeable to the verdid of my
Senfe; For I have the fame reafon to
believe that Interpretation to be falfe,
which I hs^ve to beheve the Biile I
read, to be* the Wo'-d of God. So that
the Queftaou is not^ Whetheif I fhould

bc«'

t79.1

b^ll^V? th^ Holy Scripture^ or no ; but
wbeq tijerq ari(es a Difference about
the ott?*ning of the Holy Sqripture,
which :lMt9rj>retation I ought to prefer^
rh^c whi^^ is agreeable to Senfe and
Riearpj[b>pr that which is plainly con^
p^di^my to both thefc.

^>nHy 90t God (ofQ^times tnterpoCe
tnd ai,ter the nfual courfec^Thipgs ? M»y
dot h^ oiake Things appear otberwiib
th^a ^h^y r^Ily $rq ? And» is it qot
i| iit|B?ieqt;SQCvrity againd our being
ipjp^sd ijppn thereby, that God tells us
this is fu^h ^r fuch a Being? . this i;

, W^ Pi^A we muft be very well jf-

fi»rU ihstf Qpd doth tell ua^ (b^ before wp
f^n% tp' it ; for here lies the great dan-
gpt of oijir being imposed upon^ that wc
Qiisivid b^lm^ that to b^ revealM to u^
lifh^^h reajily is noc^ an,d miftake the
nieanjipg of t;hofe words which have a
Jl^vifle Ai^hority ftampd upon them;
lifVk how can we come at the meaning
pf theoa without the AlTifliance of our Scn^
fesi ? And if my Senles may impofe upon
me , 'tis impoflible that I (hould ever
kpow what God has reveal'ci unto me.
Sejcondlyj iVe may be ftflTur'd, that God
never told vs any thing which contra-
di(Sls the Evidence of our Senles. For
God has placed our Senies in us Cot iV\\^

i 86 ]

^tty End, to difcover the differeffce 6f
one Objed: frotti atlother j the Frame and
Codftitution of our Natnre requires if,
that \^e ihontild dome! to the knowledge of
Things by the mediation of Senife ; and
therefore if I may , upon any occaHon ,
disbelieve my natural Sen(e$ fpeaking td
ttle, (vt^hich is as much the Voice of Qod
&s any Revelation can be) why miy I not
with equal feafon disbelieve thofef pretend-
ed Revelations which are contrary to th6
Evidence of ray Seftfi > Str that 'tis ira-
t>o(rible that any Revelation flioutd cooi-
tnand me to renounce itay Sen(e5> becauft
the Truth of all Revelation mud: be prov'ii
by the Evidence of Senle, which fuppofei
that the Evidence of Senfe is ilwzp
Certain , and eVer to be depended on;
And therefore what His Grac^ (ays , r^
lume 1. p. 67. That God can Impofi upon thi
Senjes of Men^ and reprefsnt things to tbeii
otherwife than they are ; is to be ttnder-
flood only of God's Power ; for fho' ht
IS able to do it, yet his Truth, and Good^
fiefs^ and Juftice, do redrain him front
putting this Power into Ad. And there-
fore no occajions can be Co extraordinary ii
to oblige God to do an uojuft tMng, of
to violate the Truth of his Word, or fcr
far to idifiofef upon us ^ as to ois^ke Olif
Senfts reprefent Obje<a?5 differed fjfcWf

Whsit tbey trulj^ tfre^ wbififll WovAi hd m

cc
u

€4

C 8f ]

effe<9k- to unravel our wfiole NatprCj and
to ni^kc our Senfes of no iife to us.

*' But, fays A^. C. why may we not be-»
Jieve J that the Accidents of Bread
may exhibit another Subftance to us,
efpecially fince we have the Word of
*^ the Son of God for it, as well as the
Accidents of a Dove and the Appea-
rance of Men could repreftnt the Ho-^
ly Ghoft, and the Angels to St. John
the Baptiji^ and to Lot ?
. And in truth, if either the Son of God
had told us fb, or there had been Mat-
ter of Fad, that this thing had adually
been done, it would be to no purpofe to
difpute againft the doing of it. , But up-,
on a little confideration it will appear,;
tiiat tho' N, C. according to his ufiiai
Cuftom, doth confidently aflert both of
thefe, yet has he no manner of Ground,
or any tolerable Reafon for fo doing.
And therefore I (hall prove,
I. That the Matter ot Fac9:is not true,
and that the Holy Ghoft was not repre-
fented by the Accidents of a Dove.
. z. That our Saviour Chrift never told
lif^^ that the Accidents of one Subftance
liiay exhibit another Subftance to us.

I. That the Matter of Fact is not true ;
The Holy Ghoft was never reprefentcd
by the Accidents of a Dove. 'Tis true,^
8. foh9t fays , / faw the Spirit dejcending

E from

[ 8t ]

fr^m Heaven , like a Dove , and it ahoJe
upon him ; and I knew him not. But he that
Jent me to baptize with water ^ the fame faid
unto me J upon whom thou (halt fee the Spirit
defcending , and remaining on him^ the fame
is he that iaptizeth with the Holy Ghoft.
Joh. I. 32.

But what would N. C infer from hence >
Would he {ay,that this appearance of a Dave
\^as the Holy Ghoft cloathed with the Acci-
dents of a Dove ? He may fay {^q indeed, but
how doth he prove it? Why may not the
Subftance of a Dove, as well as thie Acci-
dents, be there? Why might it not be
i real Dove ? This was the Opinion of
(everal of the Fathers, as St. Auftin^ Ter^
tuSian^zs alfb of Thomas Aquinas; and they
give this remarkale Realbn for it; Alia^
quin Spiritus Sanctis Homines faSeret;
that if it was not a real Dove, the Holy
Spirit would have imposed upon the
Senfes of thofe who beheld it* It
feems, they thought that it was incompa-
tible with the Divine Attributes , to im-
pofe upon the Senfes of his Creatures^
tho' they received no damage thereby.
Others were of Opinion , that as Fiery
Tongues fat upon the Heads of the Apo*
ftles, when the Holy Spirit was infus'd
into them; fo this Dove, was Fire in the
fhape of a Dove# But whatever this Dove
vssj 'tis certain 'twas the vifible Symbol

of

C 8} 3

of the Defcent of the Holy Ghod ^ ds the
Rainbo\r was of the Covenaot which
Ood made with Mankind, and the Fiety
Tongues whi^h (at upon the Heads of the
Apoftlesj and that there is not the leaA
Shadow of a Reafon to incline us to be-
lieve, that there were only the Accidents
of a Dove , (eparated from all manner of
Subftance. And as little to his purpofe^
is the other IndanCe of the Appearance
of Angels, under the Form of Men. Thac
Spirits may adiime a Body, is evident i but
that this Bodily Shape confided only of Acu
cidents, lyes upon N.C^ to prove; which
*he will never be able to do, dor indeed
doth he make any offer at it.

^. It is as evident , that our Saviour
Chrift never told us , that the Accidents
of one Subllance ^ may exhibit another
Sttbfiance to us ; if he did^ let him quot9
the Text.

But I (uppofe M C. means , TfajU: tho^
our Saviour Chrift never (aid fo in exprels
Terms, yet this may reafonably be infer'd
from what he (ays in the Holy Gofgel t
for when he tells us , That the Bread add
Wine in the Holy Communion i was his
Body and Blood j and that fince 'tis evi^i^
dent , that the Accidents of Bread and
Wine remain after the Confecration, there*
fore from thence it will follow, that the

F ^% Subt

L 84 I

SiSbftance of Bread muft be changed into
the Subftance of Chrift's Body.

But this Argument is of no force. For^
Firjl i Tho' our Saviour Chr^ft has told us,
That the Bread in the Sacrament is his
Body; yet he has not told us, that this
Bread is converted into his Real Body^
even the Literai Sence of the Words will
not bear the Interpretation.

Secondly^ We have better Evidence, That
the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament is
not changed into the Real Body and
Blood of Chrifl , than that our Saviour
ever faid theft Words j the one is evi-
denced by Three of the Senfes , the other
only by two. But, |

Laftly^ 'Tis evident , that theCb Words '
fignifie no fiich matter , both from the
Natural Signification of the Expreffion,
and its Coherence with that Context :
And becaufe this is the laft Refuge,* which:
the Papijis are forced to fly to when they
have nothing el(e to (ay j I fliall (in as^
few Words as I can) confider what out Sa-
viour mtmt by thefe y^or As, Thisis my Body.

In order to underftand thefe Words, it
will be neceflary to confider. That thri
fem were required to celebrate the Pafir-
over once a Year at Jerufalem^ (i, e.) to
eat a Lamb with bitter Herbs, and unlea-
vened Bread ; in Commemoration of the
Deliverance of their Forefathers out of

£g^pt r

[ .95 ]

Egypt : And this Lamb was called, the
l^9ris?ajfpvery in Remembrance of that
Pafcbal Lamb which was (lain in E^pt^
as a Sacrifice of Atonement, whereby the
Lord was prevailed with to. pals over the
Houfes of the Ifraelftfs^ when h« flew the
Firft-born of every Houfe in Bgypt. This
Tranfadlion being only the Type of
Chrift, who was 9 the Lamh flain to take
fivpay the Sins of the World; our Saviour
took that time of the Year when the few
jkept the Paflbver , to lay down his Life,
and to offer himfelf up for the Sins of the
whole Wp'^ld, and inftituted this Sacra-
ment of his Body and Blood, to be kept

t for ever, in Remembrance of his Death

^ and Paffion,

And therefor? the right underftand*
ing of the Paflbver , is the Key which
wili let us into the true meaning of this
Holy l^ite. Fpr if we confider it well,
it will olajnly appear, that not only
every Part and Circumftance of the
Lord's Supper, is adjufted to the Manner
of holding the P^flover; but even the
very Words and Phrafes were the very
fame, the Jem made ufe of at that Holy
Solemnity |^ and that the Words , This is
my Body^ bear a plain Relation to thefe iti
the Paflbver, This is the Lords Pajfover :
And therefore fince thefe Words in the
Paflbver fignifie only ^ that this Lamb

[88]

Whieh is Aiin, if for a perpetual Mci-

iilori&l of the Limb flain in E^ft^ and

the Deliverance which the Children of

ffrael obtained by virtue of that Sicri-

fice: So thefe Words in the SaeraMiedt

of the Lord's Supper, this is ^ Botfy^

only denote to us , that this Bread te-

Jyreients my body , which is ro be of-

fibtM up for ydti upon the Croft. And

this Interpretation I'eceive^ gteat SirMgth

iVom hence, becaufe this Form of Speech

4)6can9e very cuftomary dmongft thb

feivs^ fb that there was nothing more

ufual than for theni to fay, this is (hch

t thing, when they defign'd to intiittate,

that this fignify'd or reprefented that

very thing ; I might give you miiny

inftaftces, but one (nali ^rve infiead of

ill, Gen.^x. 26. Jrfepb expounding Pba-

faoh's Dream to him, fays, The /even good

ikrke are /even Tears^ and the feven good

Bars of Corn are feven Tears. And ^as

0is Grace tells us} it was not only fo

^mongfl: the Jews^ but it is comrtion in

all Languages to give the Name of the

Thing fignified to the Sign, As th(5

Delivery of a Deed or Writing undet

Hand and Seal is calFd a Gonveyance,

br making over of fuch an Eflate ; atta

it is really fo, not the Delivery of mcef

Wax and Parchment I but the ConVejr.

linCe of a re^l E^ate^ a; Xt^ly 9Ad 1 69I*

[87]

fy to all tffe&s and purpofcs of Law,
as if the very material Hou(es and Land^
themfelves could be, and were adually
delivered into our Hands. And that thi^
is the true meaning of the Words, will be
evident from what immediately follows
them. That he calls it his B^dy broken^ and
bis Blood jhed^ even before his Pa (lion;
and after the Confecration, he calls it
the Fruit of the Fine dill. And that the
Apoftles underflood it in a Figurative
Stn^Cj is evident, becaufe they were nof
ilartled at this Expreflion, as they would
certainly have been, if they had thought
the meaning of it was, that they mud
jeat his very Fle(b, and drink his Blood.
And afterwards, when the Jews miflook
him, and took his Words in a literal
ienft, he tells them. That the words which
heffake unto them^ were Spirit and Life^
i. e. ought to be taken in a Spiritual ami
figurative Senfe. This is only a tafte of
what is and might be faid on this Subjedt ;
but I (hall look back and confider how
N. C reprefents it, and what Colours he
puts upon it.

And, Firfty If, C tells us, That thefe
Words muft be taken in fuch a lite-
ral Senfe, as denotes the change of the
Jubilance of the Bread into the Subftance
0f Chrift's Body, He argues from Chrift's
prom^fe, Job^ 6. 5: i . I^m the living Bread

[ 8« 1

which came down from Heaven ; if any Mqn
'eat of this Breads he fl^all live for ever:
And the Bread that 1 will give is my Flefh^
which I will give for the Life of the
World.

To which I anfwer. That thefc Words
are plainly fpoke of the Dodrine of our
Saviour Chrift, which St. jfe^i?^ compareis
with the Law oi Mofes^ and alludes plain-
ly to the Manna which Mofes gaVe to the
Children of I/rael in the Wildernefs, which
thofe who eat of dy'd ; but our Saviour
gives his Followers fuch Food, and will
Iceep them alive for ever. The Childreo
oi Ifrael were fed with teniporal Promi-
fts, the Disciples of pur Saviour with the
hopes and afTurance of a blcffed Eternity j
and therefore in the 47th Verfe he fays,
He that lelieveth in me hath everlafting
Life^ whereby he explains what he means
by c:ftinghisFlc/hj i. e. believing his Doi-
(flrihe, and hereby being made Partakei*
of his Death and Padion.
' Secondly y He quotes i Cor. 10. 16. The
Cup of Bleftng which we hlefs^ is it not the
Communion of the Blood of Chrift ? The
Bread which we breaky is it not the Com-
m union of the Body of Chrift i Now fays
he, to communicate or partake of the Bo*
dy and BJood of Chrifl, is certainly to e^t
and drink of his Body and Blood.

fiue

C «9 3

But Ws evident, that by Communica-
ting of the Body and Blood of Chrift, nor
thing el/e is meant, but being made Par-
takers of the real Benefits of his Death
and Paffion, 3s by Baptifm Chriftians are
faid to be made Partakers of the Holy
Ghoft, Helf. (J. 4. becaufe prefently after-
ward he feveral times calls xtBreaJ^ v. 17.
for we being tnanyy (ire ane Bread and one
Body ; for we are Partajcers of that one
Bread. And therefore If.C. might, if he
pleas'd, as well argue from hence. That
9II Chriflians are fubdantially changed,
firft into Bread, and then into the natural
Body of Chrift, by their participation of
%ht Sacrament, becaufethey are (aid f here-
by to be one Bread and one Body.

Thirdly y N. C. quotes i Cok. i>r %7y

a 8, 29, Wherefore vohofoever (hall eat this ,

Bread or drink this Cup of the Lord un^

worthily , fhall be guilty of the Body and

Blood of the Lord. But let a Man examine

' ^imfelfy and Jo let him eat of that Bread and

drink of that Cup ; for he that eateth and

drinketh unworthily , eateth and drinketh

Pamnatien to himfelf^ not difc^rning thf

Lords Body- ' Certainly, fays he^ Dam-^

^nation is too great a Pqifliment for the

f violation of the Types and Reprefenta-

• tions only of Chrift's Body ; therefore

f • the Bread and the Cup are the true and

I real Bqdy and ^Iqod of Chrift.

C 90 3

But this Obje<9:ion is of no force, be-

caufe St. Paul tells us plainly , That 'tis

Bread that is eaten, and the Cup or Wine

that is drank ; and whofoever eats and

drinks thefe unworthily Q as the Corin^

thians did> is guilty of the Body and

Blood of Chrift, i.e. by prophaning tbi$

Holy Ordinance, they crucifie Chrifl afre/b^

and put him tean epen fhame ; and therefore

he is accounted in the (ight of God, as

Itrulyguiky of the Death ofChrift, as if

with his Hands he had nail'd him to the

Crofs, becaufe he obftinately and wilfully

continues in thofe Sins which were the

occaiions of his Death and PafTioo. And

now I think it will appear very evident

from thefe Hints I have given, That Tran-

fuhftantion has no Foundation in the Holy

Scripture, and in truth this is fo evident,

that many of their moft learned Writers

^re forcy to confefs it. And if fb, then the

Pepple are not fo groflyl abus'd as If. C.

wou'd have us believe, when they are told

liow monftroufly abfurd tnis Doiarine is ;

and that 'tis as evident, that Tranfuhfian-'

fiathn is contrary to the common fenfe

of Mankind, as that twice two make four^

Such Doctrine certainly better becomes the

Pulpit than thatCredulity thePapifts preach

1ip,whereby the People are led blindfold by

^n implicit Faith, into the belief of Non-

feq(e and Contra^idlion ; and are not on-

C9']

ly rook'd of their Money, but petfoaded
dut of their Sedfes. For, as his Grace tells
us, Credulity is certainly a Fault as well
as Infidelity ; and be who (aid, Bleffedart
they that have not feen^ and yet have le-
li&vedy hath no where faid, BleJfeJ are they
that havefeen^ and yet have net ielievetf;
touch lefs, Blejfed are they that ielieve di-
r6d;ly contrary to their Senfes.

I had like to have forgot the Challenge
whic^ this Champion of the Reman Canfe
makes to all his Adverfaries ; That if any
ene will bring lut one Jingle Argument iu
Meed and Figure^ to prove that Tranfub-
ftantiation doth either contradiS Senfe or
Reafon^ he doth fincerelj promifty he mil he
of his Opinion the very next moment. This
is fo Light and Boyiffa, that I fliall only
ikiake this Reply to it ; That when te
has returned a (erious and folid Anfwer to
any one Paragraph in the Archbilhop^
Treatife, or made good one Leaf he has
written,hre Challenge (hall be accepted. And
for his Jincere Promifes ofConverfion^ \ fliall
priy to God that by the afliftance of hr$
Grace, he may be in this as good as his word.

As to the Quotation he brings from the
Socinian^ I have already prov'd that the So-
cinian is miftaken, and that his Lordlhip is
-Certainly in the right in affirming, v That
Tranfuiffantiation may be difprov'd by the
^enfes of M^nkipd) and that fpr this plain

Cp»3

Heafon, becaufe there can be no change
in the Subfiance which, doth not a^ed the
Accidents ; but his Lordfhip has explained
this Matter (b well himfelf, that I (hall
have no need to take up the Cudgels, and
and therefore I (hall only remark, that it
is at the Forge of thefe Philiftines^ that
the Papifis (harpen their Weapons, who
are for failing with every Wind which
flatters them with the leaft hopes of Ad-
vantage.

I (hoqld npw take my leave of this Sub-
je<a, but that I find he\has referv'd his
moft doughty Objedion for ^ part-
ing Blow, and tells us that the Archbi-
shop fays ; That Trqnfuhfiatitiation was
firft introduc'd into the Catholick Reli-
gion, about the latter end of the Eighth
Century in the fecond Council of N/c(?,
and that it was almoft 300 Years before
this mir^Jhapen Mondcr was lick'd into
that Form in which it is now fettled and
eftablilh'd in the Church of Rome. But
that he is miftaken near xoo Years ; well
then^ he grants that it was not introduced
till the latter end of the fixth Century.
But, how doth he prove that the Arch-
biflbop was raiftaken ? Why, Dr. tiurn^
phry fays, that St. Aajlin brought this Do-
(Slrine into England; I have not the Book
by me, and therefore cannot contradicft
him J but however, from thofe Words he

has

[95 3

has quoted, no ftch Inference can be made,
becaufe the firft Notion of Tranfnhllantiation
wa^ far different from that which obtained
in After times, this mif-fhapen Monfler
growing ftill more deform'd, till it ob-
tained that frightful Afped we now find
it in; of which the Popiib Dodors are
(b fenfible, that they are continually em-
ployed in taking oS the Excreflences, pa*
ring the Glaws, licking it into Shape,,
and yet they do but render it more ugly
by that awkward Refemblance it bears to
a Rational Form-

And now, Ihope, it will eafily bede-
termin'd, whether His Grace or N. C. has
the moft right to thofe hard words (as he
calls them) with which N. C. concludes
this Chapter.

Of

[94]

Of Communion in one J^nd,

K

IN dating the Subjed of Difpute on this
Head , our Author tells US| that the
main Strefs lies here .*

Whether or no it le in the Power of tie
Churchy to alter her Difcipline^ in a Matter
of this Importance; fo as ro refirain the
Faithfulj to the Receiving the Sacrament in
one kind only.

But this is a falfe Reprefentation. For
Pirfi , This is no Matter of Dilctpliae,
but of Right , and Pofitivc Inflitutioo.
i^/jf- 'Tis eilential to the Nature of this
Sacrament , that it (hould be adminiffared
in both kinds; and therefore 'tis not in
the Power of the Church to alter it. Nor
3^/k. Is there any Reafonabie Cau(e, (b
to do.

Firfi^ Djjt Saviour iuftituted this Sa-
crament in both kinds. Matth. %6. %6.
And as they were eating , Jefus took breads
and llejfed it^ and brake it , and gave it to
the difciples^ and /aid , take^ eat ; this is
my body. And he took the cup^ and gave
thanks y and gave it to them^ faying^ drink
ye all of this ; for this is my blood of the
New Tefiamenty which is jhed for many^ for
the remijftonof Jins. But I jay untoyoUj I

will

I 9J ]

n>iS not henceforth drink of this fruit of the
vine^ until that day when I drink it new with
you in my Fathers kingdom. In which In*
llitution \is very remarkable , that our
Saviour lays a particular Strels upon the
Admitliftration of the Cup ; forefeeing
that there would arife a Set of Men, who
would facrilegioufly deprive the People of
it And therefore whereas he (ays only
of the Bread , take j eat ; he (ays of the
Cup, drink ye aS of this ; %nd gives the
Reafbn why they ihould aS drink of it ;
becaufe this denoted to them his Blood
which was (hed for the Remi(fion of their
Sins .* And therefore as many as expeded
Remidion of Sins by the fheddirig of his
Bloody ought to partake of this Fosderal
Rite , and be frequently put in mind of
his Death and Pailion ; And agreeably
hereunto , in i Cor. ii« 1)9X4, &c. the
Apodle St. Paul writing to the Corinthians^
tells them .• For J have received of the
Lord^ that which alfo J delivered unto you;
that the Lord JefuSy the fame night in which
he was betray d^ took head; and when he
had given thanks he hake it^ and faidy take
eaty this is my lo^ which is broken for you ;
this do in remembrance of me. After the
fame manner alfo he took the cup ^ when he
had fuppedy faying^ This cup is the New Te^
Jlament in my bloody this do y as of t as you
drink it in remembrance of me : For as often

as

\

as ye eat this Bread, and drink this Ciip^ye
do Jhew the Lord s death till he come.
Wherefore^ vohofoever fhaU eat this bread;
and drink this cup of the Lord unworthily^
/ball he guilty of the body and blood of the
Lord. But let a man examine himfelf^ and
fo let him eat of that hread^ and drink of
that cup : For he that iateth and drinketh
unworthily^ eateth and drinketh damnation .
to himfelfy not eiifcerning the Lords body:
Which evidently demonllrates to us, that
not only the Apoftles , but alfo the whole
Congregation, did receive the Cup as well
as the Bread. And as 'tis evident that
our Saviour thus inftituted the Sacrament'
in both kinds\ and that it was thus admi-
nifter*d in the times of the Apojiles ; (b if
will plainly appear, both fro-n Reafon
and the Practice of the Primitive Church,
that thus it ought ftill to be adminiftredj
and that the receiving the Cup as well as
the Bready is abfolutely necedary to a due
Participation of this Sacrament. For
fmce all Sacraments receive their Efficacy
not from any inherent Virtue of the Out-
ward Signs to produce fuch Eff^ds , but
from God s Inftitution of them to fuch
Bleifed Ends and Purpoles; therefore it
folIows,that we ought to keep up, as near
as poiTibly we can, to our Saviour's Infti-
tution, and follow his Example. Now one
chief End of celebrating this Sacrament, is

t9

to putiis iri mind of the Death of Chrift,
the breaking of bis Body^ and pouring
put of his Blood ; but this cannot be fully
reprefented to u??, but by the pouring out
of the Wine , as well as the breaking of
the Bread.

And that this was thus performed in the
Primitive Times, is evident ; the Papifis
not being able to give us any onelnftance
of any Publick Celebration of chis Sacra«
ment, where 'twas adminiflred in one
kind only. And to do them jufticae, they
do confeft this, and yet diredly contrarjr
to the plain Comnland and Inllitution of
our Bleffed Saviour, they enjoin the Peo^
pie, om Pain of Eternal Damnation, to
receive this Sacrament in one kind only ;
and the Council of Conftance decrees, that
tho' our Saviour inftituted the Sacrament
thus,and tho' it was adminiftred thus in the
Primitive Times ; yet ftoce fuch a.Cuftom
of receiving it in one kind only, had crept
into the Church, they think fit it ihouici
be. continued, and that the Bread only^
fhould be given to the People; This is the
fubftance of what His Grace has (aid in
feveral of hts Sermons.

To this Mc. replies,* That tho' our Savi-
* our did inftitute the Sacrament in both
'kinds, yet in feveral places of the Scripture
•he mentions but one ; and quotes three
Places in the ftxth Chapter of St- ^ofcn'^

I

C98]

6ifff^l^ where he fpeaks of the Bread onlyi
as verf. 50. Thu is the bread which comet h
dovin from heaven^ that a man may eat there^
of^ and not dye : verf. 51. I am the living
Ireaciy which came down jrom heaven ; // any
man eat of this hread^ he fhaU live for ever :
and the head that I will give^ is my flefb.
And verf. 58. 'this is that hread which
came down from heaven ^ he that eateth of
this hread fhaH live for ever. He alfo tells
us^ that there are three other Paflages in
the fame C/?^^/^r, which fpeak of giving
the Cup as well as the Bread: h.% verf.t^'^
Except ye eat the fle/h of the Son of Man^
and drink his blood, ye have no life in you:
verf 5 4. Whofo eateth my fle/h, anddrinketh
my blood , hath eternal life : verf 56. He
that eateth my fle/h , anddrinketh my hloody
dwelleth in me , and I in him. Now fays
N. C ** If it be true , that the Man who
*' eateth of this bread, fball live for ever i
" How can it be at the lame time true,
that he cannot live^ except he qat thfe
Bread , and drink the Cup ? Muft we '
*^ then hold thefe three PafTages , and
•' reject the reft ? As to the Proteflants, I
*^ do not fee how it can ftand with their
** Principles to do otherwife.

To which I ?».nfwer : Fir /I, That it
doth nc'i appear that this Chapter doth
relate to the Lords Supper; but that the
Bread he Tpeaks of, is the Dodlrine of the

Holy

C 99 ]

litoly Gofpel , and that we eat it by Faith %
And therefore he fays , verf. 47. Vtrilj^
*verily I Jay unto youj that he that lelievetb
dn me hath everldfting life : And this is
the Opinion of (ome Learned Men
amongft the Papifts^ and particularly of
Cardinal Cajetan. But taking it for
granted, that thefe Words do relatfe to the
Lords Sapper , yet us evident that the
Words are not to be taken literally , but
in a fpiritual Senfe : This N. C. is forc^
to confefs, and fays, " That they cannot
** be underftood in the proper add ftriift
** Meaning of the Words ; but that Eat-
•* ing and Drinking , do denote only the
** Partaking of the Body and Blood of the
** Lord : But certainly they do denote the
different manner of receiving the Parts of
this Holy Sacrament , Eating and Drink*
ing being two diftincft AAs. And fmce
our Saviour (ays fb often in the fame Cha^
^pter^ that, unlefi we eat and drink his Body
and Bloody voe cannot have Everlafting Life:
Therefore where Eating only is men-
tioned, Drinking muft be included in itj
and that it is fo,the Pradlice of ihtApoflles^
and the Primitive Church for a Thoufand
Years,is an undeniable Proof.

The next Text which N. C. quotes, is
taken from the 24//? of St, Luke ; where
the Evangc'hft t^ll us, that Chrift, after his

[106]

Rjjfiirredion, appeared to two of his Di-
fciple^, as they went to Entmdus, who ccn-
ftfaioed him to abide with them ; and
when he fat at Meat, He took Breaef^ dnd
luffed it^and brakeband gave it to t'hetn j and
their eyes were opened, and they knew him^
af$d he vanifhedout of their ^gbt. * Now
*j(ays N.C. 'tis certain, that it this Bread^
' ^vtrhich Chrift blefs'd.and brak^ , was the

* Euchafift^ we have at leaft cne Inftance,'

* in which Chrift hknfelf gave the ComniH-

* nion in onekind.To which I might returni
That if the Papi[ls have no other Inftance
but this , and this Bread was not the Eu^
cbarifi j then they have no Inftance that
our Saviour gave the Commumon in one
kind ; and that this Bread was not the
Eucharifiy is more than probable^ becaufe
cur Saviour did not difcover himfelf to
them till after they had broke Bread ; and
it is not probable, that they would receive
the Sacrament from one they did not^
know. Breaking^/ Bread was uftal at
their ordinary Meats » and is frequently
fpokeof in the Holy Scripture,when there
was no Sacrament. And there is a good
Keafon why our Saviour (hould Blep^ and
Break Bread at Emmaus^ that thereby lit
might convince his Dijciples of the truth
of his Refurrection ; and that by con-*
verfmg thus familiarly with them , they
mighc be aiTur'd that he was ^ that Jefuj

who was cTDcify'd. Aod yet gratii^ng
that this was die Sacraaient, yet fiacre
there is no other Accouot ^ givea of the
Manner of its Celebration, nor any othtf
Circuoidance mention'd 9 but only the
Breaking of Bread ; it cannot from hence
be infet'd, that our Saviour did not con--
(ecrate the Wine as well as the Bread, or
that the Communion was given h one
Kind only. But fp ready arte the Tapffls
to fnatch at the Shadow of an Argument
that they will let nothing pafs, which
they think they can wind and turn to
their purpofe, dio* they Jo(e the Subilance
thereby.

But ^. C. confidently affirms, that by
breaking Bread in the Mis of the JpCi0Jes^
U always meant xhtCamxit^iioM ; and there-
fore I defire him to cpnfult ASfs zy. 3 5.
where 5"/. Paul took Breads ait d gave Thanks
to God in pre fence of them all ; and when he
had hrpken it^ he began tM tat. Which I
believe N C himfelt will not fay, was
meant of the Sacrament ; and because
he adds, that four Great Men were of
Opinion, that the breaking of Bread at
Emmaus was the Celebration of the Sacrjt-
ment, I (ball only oppbft the Authority
of one, no very great Man, againft them
all, (i.e. himlclt) who confefles, that
this is not fo interpreted by the univerfal
confent of the Church.
^ ^ Q 3 An4

[ 101 ] ^

And now having examin'd the(e Texts
of Scripture which N. C. has brought, to
prove his Half Comwunitn ; I cannot ima-
gine what reafon he has to break out into
the following Remonftrance, with fuch
foul Language, and fo many indecencies of
Expreflion.

** And now, who would believe, fays
" he, that the Roman Catholicks had fuch
*^ grounds in Scripture for the Communion
*' in one KinJ^ confidering the loud and
** clamorous Accufations, yea, and the
^* horrible Sacrileges they are chargd
^\ with upon this Subjeca ? Well, and
** who are theft who charge us ? Why,
*' they are great and eminent Men ; great
** indeed, not only for the Rank and Sta-
** tion wherein the Powers of this World
I* . have plac'd them,but alfo great for their
^y Learning, and other excellent Endow-
^* ments* But then, Yis that they rauft
^* fd do ; the Trotefiant Religion , as all
*' the World knows, was planted in thefe
** Kingdoms by open Force and Violence.
'^ Thcfe Gentlemens Predeceflbrs poC
" fefs'd themfelves of the rich Benefices of
*^ the Church ; and when Mens Intereft
*' and Honour are once engag d, 'tis bard
'' if they do not (land by them. Now
there is no way left to juftifie thefe Pror
ceedings, but by railinj^ at the Church
*■ oiRome^ ^c. In which i^w Lints, therp

11

is fo much Scandal cram^d in* and packed (o
ciofe together, that it would require more
Time; and Paper than I have here to take
it offj and retort it ; nor indeed do I care
to foul my Fingers with that Filth, which
without Senfe or Reaibn, he fo liberally
cafl:$ about him-

" But, fays N. C. fuppofing that our
*^ Saviour did inftitute the Sacrament in
** in hoth Rlnds^ yet to Adminiftcr the Sa-
*' crament in one Kind only ^ is not contra-
" ry to our Saviour's Inftitution, becaufe
^^ the Adminiftraiion of the Communion,
** whether in one or both Kinds, is quite
^' another thing from the Inftitution of

'' It.

To which I anfwer, That our Saviour
did both inftitute and admintfter the Sa-
crament at the fame time ; but with re-
fped to us, the Adminiftration and the In-
ftitution of the Sacrament is quite diffe*
rent j and therefore His Grace argues thus ;
Chrift inftituted the Sacrament in both
Kinds, and therefore thus it ought to be
adminiftred, becaufe every Adminiftra-
tion ought to come as near as poftibly it
can to the firft Inftitution ; and tho' fome
Circumftances may be aiter'd, yet no ef^
fential Part ought to be omitted, efpe-
cially when our Saviour has made his In-
ftitution the Copy by which we ought to
^Qi^ and commanded us to do the fame

G 4 that

[

104]

that he did. And that the givifig the Cup
i$ not a Circumftance, but ah eilehtia)
part of this Sacrament, is plain ; by con-
sidering the End for which this Saci'a-
ment was inftituted, which was to repre-
fent to us the Death and Sufferings of our
Blefled Saviour, to feal to us the Pardon
of our Sins, and to convey down to us
thofe Benefits which he has purchased for
iis by his Death and Paffion. Now this
cannot be fo effedually and Cgnificantly
performed by receiving the Bread only,
which rcprefents to us only the Body of
Chrift,as by the receiving theCup,where-
by the pouring out of his Blood and his
Death upon the Crofs is fignified to us.
This M. C confefles ; " But, (ays he, the
*' Queftion is not, Whether Chrift gave
*' it in both Kinds, but whether we ought
** necefTarily to give it in both Kinds, be^
" caufe he did Co > This the Dodor af-
" firms, and we deny. But is it not plain,
that Chrift commanded his Difciples to
do what he did? And if fo, then if our
Saviour Chrift gave the Sacrament in loth
Kinds^ we ought fb to do. ** But, fays
*^ N. C. the giving it in ont Khd^ or
** botb^ is only a Gircumftance, and not
'' eflential to the Sacrament : Bur^ why
fliould not the giving the Bread be a Cir*
cumftance as well as giving the Cup ? snd

then

^hen both may be omitted; and if (b,
what will become of the Sacrament i

^^ Buty fays Nl C. we are not oblig'd
** to do every thing that Chrift did, nof
^^ imitate what he did both before and afl
^' ter the Sacrament, and therefore we are
f^ not oblig'd to give the Cup in the Sa*
^^ crament. But this doth in no wi(e fol*
low; becaufe we are (IriAly charg'd to ob«
lerve all the Eflential Parts of this Ordi*
nance; nor can any Power upon Earth
difpenfe with our non-obfervance of them.
And therefore we may juflly wonder at
the Council of Conjianciy which decreed
the giving the Sacrament in one Kind oti^
]y,with a non chfiante to the Inflitution of
Chrid, and the Pradiice of Chriftians in
the firft Ages of the Church.

But that the Council o{ Confiance 6\A
thus decree it, N. C. roundly denies, and
ers himfelf after this following man-
r : " Good God ! What may not Men
undertake, who have the confidence to
give out fuch Calumnies for Truth?
'Tis a vulgar Obfervation, but a true
*' one, that when Mountebanks pretend
** moft to infallible Cures, they are then
<* fartheft from them ; juft fo 'tis with
** thofe Gentlemen, when they pretend
*Vmofi: to Evidence and Demonftration
*^ in Matters of Religion> then they have
*' the lead coloqr, or reafonable pretence

'' to

cc

1,06}

to it. But the beft way to refute this
Calnmny, is to cite the very words of
** the Council, and then let the Reader
^ judge what Faith is to be given to Men
** who were fuch Impoftors for Truths

Well, fince he has appealed to the Coun.
ciI,To the Council we will go. And the
Words of the Council are thefe ; ** In the
*' Name of the Holy and undivided Tri-
** nity, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit*
*' Amen. Since there are certain Perfons
in divers Parts of the World who pre*
fume to adert, That all Chriflian Peo-
*' pie ought to receive the Holy Sacra-
^' ment of the Eucharift in both Kinds,
*^ under the Species of Bread and Wine.
*^ And that the Laity communicated not
" only under the Species of Bread , but
" alfo under the Species of Wine , even
** after Supper, and when they are not
** fading J and that they obftinately
** maintain, that they ought thus to re-
*' receive it, contrary to the laudable cu-
" ftom of the Church, grounded upon
•* Reafon, which they endeavour to con?
*' demn as Sacrilegious* For this reafbn,
^* this prefent holy and general Council
** held at Conftance^ aflifted by the holy
** holy Spirit of God, and being met in
^^ order to provide for the Safety of the
*' Faithful againfl: this Error, after a long
^\ confulcation of many Do(^ors, both 01

^ Divinity

[ »07 ]

" Divinity and Law, doth declare, de-

" cree, and define, That tho' Chrift af-

** ter Supper, did inftitute and adminifter

*^ to his Difciples in both Kinds, both of

*^ the Bread and Wine, this venerable Sa

** cramenty yet this, notwithftanding the*

" laudable Authority of the holy Canons*

*^ and the approved Cuftom of the Church,

^ bath, and doth oblige us to hold, that

^^ this Sacrament ought not to be celebra*

^^ ted after Supper, nor at fuch times

** \yhen the Faithful are not Fading, un-

•* lefs in ca(e of Sicknefi, or of abfolute

'^ Neccflity, allowed by the Law or the

^^ Church. And fince this Cuftom is

** reafbnably introduced , to avoid fome

* * Inconveniences and Dtangers, that the'

^* in the Primitive Church the Faithful

" did receive the Sacrament in both

•* Kinds, and afterwards the Prieft that

** Adminiftred in both Kinds, and the

^* Laity under the Species of Bread, yet

** it is moft firmly to be believed, and in

" no wife to be doubted of, that the

" whole Body and Blood of Chrift is tru-^

** ly contain'd zander the Species either of

** Bread or Wine ; a cuftom of recei*

^' ving it only in one Kind only, has

** been introduc'd, and long obftrv'd,

*' the (ame is to be held as a Law, that

J* may neither be rejedted nor changed,

^* otherwife than by the Church's Autho-

f^ rjty: An4

And prefently afterwards ; ^* And this
>* holy Synod doth decree, — That tho^
** who Adminiftcr the Sacrament to the
•* People under both Kinds, and teach,
" that it ought (b to be admiaiilred, fliall
" be cffedually puniihed.
' In Uomine Sanfla \S Individm Trinita-
fu , FaUis , ® Fiiii , &f Spiritus SanSi^
Amen. Cum in mnnuUk tnundi partiius
^quidam temerarie afferen prafumant^ PopM-
lum ChriflianHm dtbere Sacrrnn Eucharifiia
Sacramentum fub utraque Panis & f^ini fpe»
clefufcipere^ & nonjolum Specie PaHis , fed
etiamfuh fpecie Vint Populum LaicMm pnjfim
etiam pofi ctenam^ vel ali^s non fejunuw^ ^
communicandum ejje pertinaciter afferant;
contra laudahilem Ecclefia confuetHJinem
ratit)ttahiUter approhatam , quam tayiquatn
facritegam damnahiliter reprobare <0nantMr :
Hinc efi^ quod hoc prcefens Concilium facrum
gene rale Conflantienfe^ inSpirtfu SanElo legt-
time congregatum , adverfm hunc errorem
Jaluti fiaelium provider e Jatagetis , matura
plurium Doilorum , tarn divini quam bumani
juris^deliberatione prahabrfa I declarat^ de-
cernit^ & deffinit ; quod licet Lhriflus po{^
coenam inftituerit^ & fuis Difcipulis admin i-
ftraverit fub utraque fpecie Panis & f^ini
fjoc venerahile Sacramentum • tawen hoc non
obflante^ facrorum Canonum Authoritas lau»
dabilis ^ & approhata Confuetudo Ecclejia^
fervavit^ &Jervat; quod hujuf modi Sacral

m^ntum

inentwn nan debet cBufici pQ^ ctenam , ne^uc
a fidelthus recipi non jejunis; nifi in ca/u
infirmitatis^ aut alter hu necejfitatis f a Jure
vel Ecclefia cstneffo^ vel admijfo. Et ficut
Gonfueinde hac ad evifandutn aliqua perkuld
& fiandala , efi ratienaltliter intr^dn^a ;.
quad licet in Primitiva Ecclefia hujufwefdi
Sacratnentum reciperetur i fidelihm fuh
utraque /pecie ; poftea d conficientihm Jub
utraque^ & ^ Laicis tantummodo fub fpi^^
cie Fanu fufcipiatur ; cum certrjfime crtden^
dum fit^ ^ fiuOateviU dubitandum , integram ,
Chrifii Corpus & Sanguinem^ tarn fub f pecie,
tanis^ quaw fub fpecie Fini^ veraciter cmitU
fieri. :

Item ip fa Sanlia SynoJa decernit & de^
clarat fuper ifla materia ^ Reverendifimis in
ChrifloPairibus & Dominis^Patriarcbis^&t,
ut effe£lualiter puniant eos contra hoc Decre^^
turn excedentes; qui communicando Populi
fub utraque fpecie Panis & Fini exbortats
fuerinty & fie faciendum ejfe docuerint^ ^c.

And now, let any one who reads this
judge to whom Credit is to be givefl, md
whether N. C. or His Grace^ is moft like-
ly to vevd Impofturesfcr Truth, JFor, doth
rrot the Council fay, That our Saviour in*
fticuted the Sacrament of the Lord's Sup-i
Supper in Loth Kinds } Doth it not con-
feis, That that it was received by the
Faithful in the Pritpltive Times of the
Church? And yet notwithftmdvtv^ ,^V\

[ . .0 !!

this, doth it not decree,- That thofe Prieft$
(hall be punifh'd that Adminifter to the
to the People in both Kinds, or teach thdt
thus it ought to be Adminiilred ? What
fliall we fay to thofe Men who know thefe
things, isind yet have the Forehead to de-
ny them > But this is very agreeable to
that Rule which //.Clays down in the
foregoing Chapter j *^ That in this fort
" of Writing, i.e. in difputing with He*
*' reticks, 'tis natural for any Man to take
'^ all kind of juft Advantage of his Ad-
•* verfary in order to confute him, even
** to the filencing of fome part of the
" Truth, when it is not to his purpofe.

And now tho' it ftems fiifficiently evi.
deotjcven by their own confeffion, tharthis
Practice of giving the Sacrament was but
of late date , and a novel Invention ; and
introduced into the Church without any
good Reafon : Yet I (hall confider what
N. C. has farther to (ay for bimfelf. Now
amongft thofe other Shifts and Eva/tons
Fapijis have invented , the chief is the
Dodirine of Cpncomitancy ; the meaning of
which is this J They fay. there is no need
of receiving the Cup , becaufe the Body
of Chrift doth contain the Blood; fo that
whofbever receives the Body of Chrift,
receives the Blood alfb .- And indeed
this feems to be the natural Confeqijence

t>i that abfurd Po(arine of Tranfuhfiantia^

[ ... ]

tion : For when they once came to be Co
hardy as to believe, that the whole Body
and Blood of Chrifl; is in the Sacrament^
and that in every crumb of the Bread,
there is a whole Chrifl; ; Body, Soul, and
Divinity ; and that. our Saviour took him-
felf in his own Hand , and gave himfelf
to his Difciples, and put himielf into his
own Mouth : Then from theCe notorious
Abfurdities , 'twas natural to infer many
more. To conclude ,• That the Receiving
a whole Chrift ought to be but one entire
AiSt , and that after they had received a
whole Chrifl: in the Wafer, it would con-
(litute a new Sacrament , to receive him
over again in the Cup ; and therefore
they brought in the Cuftom of Receiving
is 09ie kind only.X\\\xs fruitful of Abfurdities
in Error.

Againft this DoArine of Concomitancy
His Grace argues , That in the Sacrament
the Bread reprefents Chrift's Body with-
out the Bipod , the Cup his Blood poured
out ; and both together , the Death and
Crucifixion of our Blefled Saviour: But
His Grace doth not fay, (as N". C. would
have him,) That the Body of our Saviour
Chrifl: was drain'd of every drop of Blood;
but that the Sacrament of the Lord's Sup-
per being a Reprefentation of the Death
and Padion of our Blefled Saviour ; His
)3ody is reprefented by the Bread, and his

C«'0

6J.ood. is rcprefented as poured out , hf
tbe Wine; and that both thefe make up tte
Type or Repreftntation of his Paflion;
and that therefore both thefe are eflentiaJ
to the due Adminiflration of this Sacra-
ment.

K C. acknowledges , That the Primi-
tive Chriftians did receive it thus , and
agrees with His Grace^ in giving the very
fame Reafbn for it : Becaufe the Reprefen-
tMtioH of the Death of our Lord is morcfuOj
exprefSi in hoth kinds , than in one. But
then he tells us , that he mufl: confider^
"? That this Reprefentation is ribt of that
^ Importance , as to balance all the.
** ^ycighty Confiderations , that mov'd

tl|e Church to command the u(e only
*? of one kind ; or to make amends for
" the horrid Prophanation and Abufes,
" which muft inevitably attend the Com-
*f munion in both kinds, in a degenerate.
^^ Age, in which aU Piety andGoodnef^
** are almoft extinguifh'd.

But what weighty Confiderations, and
whaf fcandalous Abufes he means , I do
not know ; for moft of thofe he inftances
in, are not fb. Bellarmine indeed tells us,
That the Cup is taken away, becaufe one
Prieft could not adminifter to a great
Number of Communicants ; that in fome
Places they have no Wine, and fbme Per-
ions have a natural averfncfs for it ; ^pc

€<

ceftainiy thcfe could ilotbetHe weighty
Reaibns : For he muft needs be fenfible,
that none of thefe could be a Reafon of
denying the Cup to the People, but in
fome exthordinary Cafts , which ought
not to be a Role for. the conflant Admi-
niftration of it. Nor can I imagine what
Abufes the Cup. is more liable to than
the Bread; unlefs that in fome Coun*.
tries it (hould hang upon the prophane
Whiskers of the Laity ; and then in fucbi
a Cafe, moft People would judge it more
expedient, that thofe Perfbns (hould be ana-
thematized, who would not cut off their
Whiskers, rather than that the good Peo-
ple (hould be defrauded of one half of the
Sacrament , and be deprived of the pre-
cious Blood of their Blefled Saviour.

^ I have never heard of any other Abufes
objeded againft thofe who receive fhis
Sacrament in both kinds ; only M. C
(^ whofe Talent lyes peculiarly in Scan^
dal) tells us offome ^\Lihertine Prote[lantSy
** who being, drunk over night, come ini,

* ' the Morning to receive the Sacrament,
*' and drink up whole Comniuniqn-Cups
" of Gonfecrated Wine. But fuqh Scan-
dalous Reports as thefe are fo common-
ly forg'd amongft the Papiftsj that no.
Reader who has but the leafl Tafle of
rfieir Writings , can be (liocjk'd at them j

H and

C >'+3

and therefore I (hall efieem this filfy
Story of equal Authority with the Nags-
head It zhXe. And truly I am fo much his
Friend , that I cannot forbear giving him
a little Advice : That he would either
give over his Endeavours to Impofe upon
the World by fuch idle Reports ; or quit
the Title to , The Author of the True and
MoJeft Account.

For let me (^who know this Matter bet-
ter than he can doj affure him, that this
Sacrament is Adminiftred in all our
Churches, with the greateft Decency and
Solemnity imaginable; and that we are
as free from all thefe Prophanations and
Abufes, as the Church of Rome can be.

But fuppofe a drop or two of the Wine
Ihould chance to be (pilt , this is no
greater Prophanation of the Sacrament,
than the dropping fome crunibs of the
Bread; which in the Primitive Church
muft frequently happen , when they fent
fome portions of the Confecrated Bread to
their abfent Friends ,• and fometimes fent
the Holy bcrament by Boys to the Sick,
and gave the Wine to Sucking-Children :
And if this is a fuificient Caufe of de-
priving the People oi the Cup, for the
fame Reafon they might take away the
Bread alfo.

\

C'>5]

N. C/s laft Excufe Q to take off the
Guilt of Sacrilege (torn his Church) is,
That the Papifts may as well vary from
Chrift^s Inftitution in the Sacrament of
the Lord's Supper, as we Proteflants do in
the Sacrament of Baptifin, by fiibftituting
Sprinkling ^ inftead of Dipping : But 'tis
evident that there is an abfolute Nec^«
ty for this in cold Countries : And we
may be affiir d , both from the Holy Scri-
pture, and the Contemplation of the Di-
vine Attributes ; that God is better pleased
with an hSt of Mercy^ than Sacrifice.

■ ■■ - ■ ■ '—■ — — -"— -^^^— "^•^^■~^tr~^-niif-

Hi Of

Of Prayers in an mkjnmri

Tongue.

IN the beginning of this Chapter, onr
Author endeavours to impofe upon
tha ignorant and unwary Reader, by de-
nying the Matter of Fa&, aind affirming,
that the Papi/ls do not pray in an unknown
Tmtgue^yut in the Latin Tongue^which is the
tai^ knovtin Tongue in the World ; taking
it for granted, That the Publick Praters
of the Church ought to be offered up in
the fame Tongue all the World over.

By faying that they pray in the moft|
known Tongue^ If. ۥ feems to grant, that'
^tis mod fuitable to the nature of Prayer
to be offer'd up in that Tongue] which is
beft upderftood by the People. But thenr
the Queftion will be,

Whether the daily Offites of the Church
ought to be pffer'd up in all Countries
and Places in one Language, or elfe iri
every Country in that Language, which
is beft underftood by thofe Perfons who
arc required to joi«i in thefe Publick Of-
fices of Religion > And niethinks there
fiiould not be much contention about
this matter, when the Difpute may be fo
eafjly decided, by the common Scnfe of

Man-'

.Mankind, and the exprefs Words of th?
Holy Scripture. But let us hear what the
Archbifliop fays on this Subjedl ;

And, Firft^ His Grace fays, That the
celebrating the Divine Service in an un-^
known TonguCy is contrary to the Pradice
of the Primitive Church. And for the
Proof of this he quotes Origen : And BeU
larwin himftlf confefles, that the Arme^
nians^ Egyptians^ Ethiopians^ Ruffians^ and
others did, and do ftill ufe their own Lan-
guage in their Liturgies even at this Day.

To which If. C. anfwers, ^ That by an

* unknown Tongue is meant, either fiich a

* Tongue as no body underftands, or elfe

* fuch a Tongue as is unknown to moft of the

* common People. But this is the moft
{enflefs Diftin<9tion that can be imagined j
for, how can there be fuch a Tongue which
nobody underftands ? Or, in other wprds^
fuch a Tongue which no body in the World
cftn fpeak j for nobody canTpeak a Tongue
Which he doth not underftand Welf,
butN. C. tells us, ^ The Priniitive Church;

* and all fucceedirig 'Generations , (he

* means the Latin Church'^ did celebrate

* Divine Service in the Latin Tongue i arid
then he tells us, • That the cornmbri Peo-

* pie (except the Italians') were alway$
^ ignorant of the Latin Tongue^ What, in
the Lati^ Churchy itnd in^th^ Primitive
Times $ And if io, how came Divine Stt^

' H 3 yvc^

[ '"J

not as capable of being edified , and of
having our Hearts and AfFedions mov'd
and excited by them? Where lies the
difference ?

N.C. confefles all this; but comes in
with a tiotmtbftanding^ the Church doth not
think fit to alter it. But what Church
doth not think fit ? Why the Romifh
Church : And therefore I thinic it a
very good Reafbn why that Church Ihould
receive confiderable Alterations , and a
thorough Reformation : Becaufc 'tis plaiir,
that it is fo much corrupted, that it can-
not be prevailed on to reform tjie moft
notorious and fcandalous Abufes ; Nay^
that it is (q far from reforming them,
that it endeavours to keep People in Ignq*
ranee of the moft neceflary part of their
Duty, and has double-lock'd the Door of
Knowledge .- For as if their faying their
Prayers in jn unknown tongue w^s not fuf-
ficienr, and left there ftiould be fome of
the Congregation who (hould underftand
the Latin Tongue , and by confequence
join in their Publick Worlhip, .N.C. tells
us, That the greatpjt part oj the Ma(s is
fronouncdfo lop^ that Jcarce any who is pre^
fent hears whet is /aid. So that if there is
any fuch thing in the World , as a Tongue
which 7iG Man can underftand ^ it is that
Tonsue in which they celebrate the
Publipk Prayers of their Church ,- which

con-

commoa Reafbn tells us, ought to be the
tongue which isbeft underftood.

3, But if the Papifls wilJ not be per-
fuaded to follow the Primitive Practice of

the Church, C ^^ ^^^^^^ ^^^Y Pretend to
pay great Deference) nor receive any con-
vidion from the Reafbn of the thing , or
rhe End of Divine Worihip ; yet methinks
they fhould hearken to the Voice of God,
in the Revelation of his Holy Word .•
Since there is no lel^ than a whole Chap-^
ter^ the Fourteenth of the Firfl Epifile of
St. Paul to the Corinthians , which treats
purpofely on this Matter » and plainly
condemns this Pradice. And this the
Jpoftle doth in fuch plain and exprefs
Terms , that I cannot but wonder that
any one who has read that Chapter ^ (hould
juftifie that unreafbnable Pradice .- But
fbmething they muflfay, when they are
refblv'd to uphold it.

Now ^T.C. tells us, that there is no fuch
thing as unknom^ in all that Chapter ; but
the Word is added by the Tranflators
of the Englifb Bible , how truly we fhall
ibon fee; And this Firft ^ From the
ufual Signification of the Word in the
Original; and Secondly ^ From the Scope
^nd Defign of the whole Chapter. And
Fir ft ^ From the ufual Signification of the
Word in the Holy Scripture. Now the
Word in the Or /^/»j/ which is tranflated

* «K-

C m 3

'^ unknovon tongue , has feveral Significa-
tions; (bmetimes 'tis taken for the Faculty
of Speaking , fometimes for the Peculiar
Language of every Nation, but generally
for unknown Tongues, And fince this Word
has divers Significations, we mud be de-
termined, as to its Meaning here, by confi-
fidering the Defign of the Text^ and of the
whole Chapter^

And here I agree with my Author, that
by Tongues in this Chapter are meant, that
extraordinary and furprizing Gift of
Tongues , wherewith the firft Believers
were infpired by the HolyGhoft; who
infus'd into them the Ability of Speaking
in different Tongues, (uch as they who
(poke them never learnt, but were under-
flood by thofe who heard them. For the
Apoftles being (ent by our Blefled Saviour,
to propagate the Gofpel thro* the whole
World ; and it being neceflary that they
(hould Preach the Gofpel to every Peo-
ple in a Tongue which they underftood ;
and impoffible that they (hould learn all
thofe Languages in a Natural Way, in fo

* TLAfTAv yP^c^TAv ^etaivtl^i y omnem dicendi faculta-
tem excute. Arilloph.

Thecayy]^ X*^^^"P ' forma fermonis unicuique genti
peculiaris. Hercd.

^AyvenToTetloi rlw yh^osctVy ignoto fermone uteates.
Thucyd.

YKosZv ^nymi^ , iaterpretatio vocum obfcurioram.

C <»? ]

fmall a time ; God was pleafed to fupply
this Natural Defed, by the Extraordinary
AHTifiance and Infpiration of his Holy
Spirit.- So that in whatfoever Country
or Nation they came, they were enabled
to {peak readily in the Language of that
Country, and were plainly undcrftood by
the Hearers ; which was neceflary to their
reaping Benefit by their Prayers and
Preaching. Again , the ApofUes being
oftentimes caird to (peak to a mixt Mul-
titude, confiding of many People and
Nations , who did not underdand the
Language which the Apoflles naturally
(pake, nor one another, nor bad any one
common Language between them .* Ic
pleafed God to inQ)ire the Apodles after
(6 miraculous a manner, that tho'they
(pake but one Tongue , yet it was as
efTediual as if they had fpoken many ; and
every particular Hearer heard the Word
PreaclVd in his own Tongue , which he
naturally underftood. And this J take to
be the meaning of the Gift of Tongues.-
And if fb, then what N. C. affirms can-
not be true ; That this extraordinary Gift
of Tongues^ was given rather as a Sign to the
Unhelievers^ than for the InftruSlion of the
Faithful. That this is a grds Miftake, is
evi-dent from the Defign of this Chapter;
which is to (how, That tho'the (peaking
in unknown gndjl range Tongnes^ was ufcful

foif

!E 114]

for the (peedy Converfipn of Unbelievers,^
yet when us'd for the Inftrudtion of the
Faithful, Ccall'd Prophefying) 'twas much
more beneficial to the Church. And there-
fore the Apoftle advifes theni rather to
covet Prophefying , Q /. e.') Interpreting
the Holy Scriptures to their Hearers, than
Speaking with Tongues ; becaufe tho' the
firft might raife the greater Admiration
and Verier ation to their Perfons , yet the
other was of more general Ufe , and
tended more to the Edification of the
Church. This being the true Notion of
Speaking with Tongues, *tis plain, that
Praying' in a Tongufe which the Genera-
lity of the People do not underftand , is
exprefly contrary to the Defign of the
Apoftle in this Chapter : For fince there
was but two Ends for which this Miracu-
lous Gift was beft owed upon the Church;
the Converfion of Infidels , and the
Strengthning the Faithful in their Holy
Belief; neither of thefe can be obtained, in
cur Times, by Preaching and Praying in
fuch a Tongue, as the Generality of the
People are ip,norant of ; And the Apo-
ftle tells us, That the End of all Publick
Prayer and Preaching , ought to be the
Edification of theHeirersj and that 'tis
as abfurd to Pray or Preach in an unknown
Tongue, as for a Trumpet to give fuch
an indiftind: Soiind in the time of Battelv

; that

that no body caii, tell the meaning of It,
whether it betokens a Charge or a Re*.
treat, ver. 8. In like manner, if we fpeak
or pray in Publick, in a Language the
People do not undei^ftand, they can nei^
their join together in Prayer , nor (ay
Jmen to it ; nor are they edified by the
Preaching : 'this is fo evidently the de-
fign and tendency of this Chapter, that
one would think it needed no Comment.
And if fo, then N. C. \ Obje<9:ipn is of hp
force, That the Word in the Original is
(bmetimcs tranflated Tongues abfolutely ,
and fbmetimes unknown Tongues ; for (ince
this Word is taken both ways in otheif
Authors, there is reafon tliat it fhould bd
(b tranflated, and the Senfe of the Place,
and the Coherence with what goes be-
fbre and what follows, muft det6raiine
when 'tis to be taken in one' figriification
and when in the other ; and that 'tis thus
duly and prdfferly tranflated , any one of
competent Knowledge and Learning may.
eafily judge. Thus I think it is as dear
as Noon-day, from Antiquity, Reafon,
and the Holy Scriptwe, Tfiat the Pub-^
Irck Service of the Church ought to be
offered up in a Tongue which the Ped-
prle underftood. But to leave them no
nianner of excufe, I will confider what
they fay for 'themfelves, and with what
Fig' leaves they cover this unfbund Parr,

ht4

And, Firfl, N.C. tells us, 'That the

* performance of the Publick OflSces of

* the Church in oqe common Tongues

* contributes very much to foment the

* Union of the Church '' : To foment a
Union is a very odd expreflion j C^nd in-
deed N. C. is very unhappy in his Expret
fions thro' the whole Book, tho* I have
not thought it worth my while to take no-
tice of them}. Well, but (pafling over
the abfurdity of the Expreflion} how doth
it contribute to the Union of the Church
to have the Publick Offices of Religion
perform'd in the fame Tongue in all the
Nations of the World ? Methinks, if they
were perform'd in never Co many Lan-
guages, if there were but care taken, that
they wer^ fuch as no body underftoodi
they would have the very fame ESh&.

* But, fays N. C. all the Members of

* the Catholkk Church ought to have Com-
^ munion and FellowQiip one with ano-
^ther; they fhould all be united in poe

* Faith, and one uniform Worfliip of one

* God } they ought all to be qualified for
' the Participation of the fame Sacrament,

* and to aflift together at the Publick Di-

* vine Service where ever they meet ; elfe,

* how can the Unity of their Faith and

* Communion fubfifl? " In which words
Nl C. feems to affirm, That all Unity, whe-
thcr of Worihlp or f ^viU> defends on the

C <»7 3

having one common Language in our
Publick Devotions J as for the Unity of
Faith/ 'tis evident, Men may believe the
fame Creed , tho' they make ufe of a
different way of Worfliip, much more
when they ufe the fame Form of Wor-
(hip, tho' in a different Tongue ; and as
for the Unity of Worftiip, that doth not
depend on the ferving God with the fame
Tone of the Voice, or making the fame
Sound, but in offering up to God the (ame
devout Affedions, in joining together in
the fame Prayers and Praifes, and in ad-
dreffing our felves to God after the fame
manner, with one Heart and with one
Voice. Now, how can this be performed
when the generality of the People do not
underftand the Tongue, in which the Pub-
lick OiBces of Religion are perform'd ?
And when they are faid in Co low a Voice^
that very few, even of thofe who are pre-
fent, can hear them. And, to ufe N. C's
own words , which immediately follow
this Objedion, and are a fufficient anfwer
to it ; ' For how, fays he, can I join in

* Prayer, or in God's Publick Worfliip,

* with any Society of People, when I can-

* not difcern by any thing they do or fay,
' whether they are Catholicks or Here-

* ticks > or, how ihall I receive the Sacra-

* ment in the Society of thofc, who for

* any thing 1 can fee or underftand, rtiay

* be feivsy pr Bkfpheiners^of my Holy Re-

* ligion **? Thus N. C. has given a fuffi-
cient Anfwer to himfelf, like one of thofe
little waCpilb Animals, who carry in their
Tails* an Antidote for their own Sting.
Had he as good a knack in proving as in
s^nfwering what he fays, he would be a
much more formidscble Adverfary ; but
how he will make out what immediately
follows, I cannot imagine r That the per-
forming the Service in Latin^ is the gond
that unites and cemeqts all the Members
of Chrift's Myftical Body,; gnd that the
\i{hole Frame of, the (^atholkk Church
would di0bl;ve and f^H to pieces,, if this^
were taken away. I fuppofe he muft
mean, that it unites the Members of the
Rotnifh Church in Ignorance, which, as
they tell us, is the Mother of Religion
and Devotion. But farther, N. C. tells
us, * That the diific ulty of tranflating the
%Litirrgy into Vulgar Languages, and
^ preferving it in its Purity, is enough ta

* difTuade us from the Undertaking ; and-
Vthat the Uniformity of the Litur^ i§ the.
*,beft flanding Mojnument we have of the
*,Faith and Pradice of our Anceflors ; W

* it that (hews us, how they u^'d to Ad-
^ minifler the Sacraments, and what forts
\ of Ceremonies they judged mofl proper

* to excite and flir up Devotion , and to'

* perform God's Service with that Gravi-.

* ty arid Decency fiiitable td his Holy Rd^

* ligion ; arid that if it were tranflated

* into Vulgar Languages, it would requird

* frequent Alterations and Changes, and

* be the caufe of endlefs Difturbances.

To which I dnfwer, That it plainly apJ
pears from the Liturgy of the Church of
England^ which was compiled One hun-
dred and forty Years ago, stnd yet retains
its Primitive Purity, without any confi-
derable uncouthneft of the Phrafe ; thai
the Publick Prayers may be tranflated in-
to fuch Sterling Language, ^nd fuch
Simplicity of Expreflion, as may continue
a long while without any need of Altera*
tion J and that if once in a Century a few
words were chang'd,it would not caufe anjr
Commotions or Difturbances, nor anyal^
teration in the Senft.

And that 'tis very true, that the Uni-
formity of our Liturgjf is of excellent tlfe,
and cannot be fufficiently commended.
But when N. G. fays, * 'tis the beft ftanding

* Monument we have of the Faith and Pra-
^ (9:ice of bur Ariceftors , he fhould have
made an Exception of the Holy Scri-
ptures. But can he be Co ftuptd as to think,
that this Uniformity doth confift only in
the Uniformity of Language ? Doth he
not know, that 'tis a Uniformity of Do-
dlrine, a Uniformity of Heart, of Voide,
of Rites and Ceremonies, which is fo pro-

C >3oi

per to eiccite and ftir up DeVotion i which
we may have, nay, which is much bet-
ter obtain d, when the Publick Prayers of
every Nation are tranflated into that Lan^
guagej which is mod commonly and h^
miiiarly us*d by the People who inhabit
it ; whereas Prayer in a Foreign Tongue
is of no ufe^ 'tis z. mocking ofGoJ^ and gi-
ving the People a Stone inftead of Bread.
This, I think, is all that is material to
be faid on this Subjed: ; I pafs on to ano-
ther notorious Abufe, which has obtairt'd
in the Church ofRome^ and very near akin
to it, and is treated of in the fame Cbap^
ter.

The Fapifis are charged by Fiis Grace^
that they lock up the Holy Scriptures in an
unknown Tongue, and for hid the common
feople the ufe of them.

To this Charge N. C. replies, * That
* 'tis wholly groundlefs and notorioufly

* falfe, and unworthy the Charader and
^ Reputation of Dr. Tillotfon; that 'tis as
^ clear as the Sun at Noon-day , that the

* Tapifts have the Scriptures in all the

* Vulgar Languages fpok^n in thofe Parts

* pf the World where they live ; that the
^ Doway Bible and Rhemfh Teflament are

* common, and in the hands of the Peo-

* pie, as alfb the French Bible ; and that
^ in Spain^ Germany^ and Italy^ the People

* have the Scriptures iph the Vulgar Lan*

'., to fhis I anfwer , Firfi , That thdij
Tranflations which have been vntdt of the
Bible into the F'ulgar Tofigue, wefe fore dt
from them ; for when they found that tM
People could not be with-held frorii read-
ing the Sibld^ and looking into thofe
Tranflations which the Troiefldnti had
publifli'd, they thought it would be bet-
to to let them have one of theii^ own
dreffing up ,• and the)^ hive provided fuch
Tranflations as run diredlly contrary tp
the Original, and haVe foifted into them'
fo many Popiih Teqents, and have in-
serted fo much of their own Supetfticion,'
that they have turned this wholfbme Food
into deadly Poifon ; an inftance of which
^e have in that Bihle printed at Bdtif^
deauXy A. D. i686»

Seiopdly^ The common People af e hot
permitted to read any * Tranflation bu^'
ifheir own, nor thefe Tranflations with*'
out Licenfe ; and to obtain a Licenfe/ i
Man mufl: /Tr/?, have the Confent of his
J^ariih-Prieft; fecondly^ the Leave ojf the
Bifhop and the Inquificor mufl be asked ;

and'

* Cum expsrimento manifeftum fity fi Sdcra BiblU Fklgari
Lingua pa/ftm fine difcrimine . permittantury plus tnde detri-.,
fnenti rjuam utilitms oriri oh bominum ten^eritaiem \ bdc irt
parte ^udicio Epifcopi aut Inqitifitoris fUtuti ut cum confiUe
Farocbi vel Cpnl^jjlirii Bibljorum i Citholicis Autborib'uf ver-
forum leclion&n in Fulgari Lingua eis concedere pojjint, .quoS
insellexerint ex bujujmodi legions n6n damnum^ jedfidei aij',
qf$e pietatis atgnmentum capere fcffe: quam f^CKitatm iiv
jertptis hdbeant, De Lib. Prohib.'Reg^. 4,' v ,-s

and this mufi be under his Hand id
Wf itihg J and this is never granted, but
only to fuch Perfbns as they are very
fecure of, fuch as do not defign an In-
creafe of Knowledge, but only of Faith and
Piety. So that a Licence, with all thefe Li-
nniitations,is no Licence at alL And then,!et
any one judge,whether the Council oiTrent
(^to which he appeals) //^/iS; not in the leaftfa^
vour thQ locking up the Holy Scripture from
the People. 'Tis certain, that our Saviour
made no fuch Limitations^ in whofe time,
fhe Poor had the Go/pel Preache)d unto them.
Thirdly^ They allow of no Interpreta-
tion of the Holy Scriptures , but what is
put upon it by that Church, /, e. the
Church of Rome. So that for a Private
Perfon to be too prying and Jnquifitive
into the Meaning ot the Holy Scripture,
efpecially into any Point of Controverfyy
is the way to have his Licence Q which
is revocable } taken from him ; and 'tis
well if he efcapes the Inquifition, if he be

an

That is, fince 'tis evident from Experience, that if the
Sacred Bible were permitted indifferently, and without
diftinfliion, to be read in the Fiilgar Torigue^ fuch a Li-
berty (by rcafon of Mens Raflinel's) would produce more
hurt than good 5 be it therefore left to the Bifliop*s or
Inquifitor's Judgment, by and with the Advice of the
Parilh Prieff, or Confeflor, to give leave to read the
Verfms of the Bible, tranllated by CxthoUck Authors into
the Vulgar Language, to fuch Peribn!;", who, as they (hall
determine, will not receive Prejudice, but an increafe of
Faith and Piety thereby.

[>33]

an Inhabitant of the Popi/h Countries ; tho^
to thofe in England they may be more
favonrable, becaufe they cannot help it.

Lafily , To make all fare , (for tis 'ten
to one but Truth will out, and 'tis a very
di£Scult matter to conceal it in fuch Pry.
ing Times) they prefer Unwritten Tradi-
tions before the Word of GOD; and
U. C tells us (b ^and gives us this Reafon
for it ; *' That Chrift our Lord com-
^* manded his Difciples to go and Preach
" the Gofpeli but we do not find, that he
'^ gave any Injundion about giving his
** Word in Writing to the People, in
•- order to learn their Faith. As if com-
mitting the Gofpel to Writing , was not as
much Preaching of it , as declaring the
Contents of it to the People with their
Voice.

And now having C as I think , made
good this Aflertion, That the Papifis lock
up the Holy Scriptures in an unknown
Tongue) I hope there needs not much to
be (aid to prov€. That they are guilty of a
heinous Sin , and a facrilegious Theft in
fb doing; and therefore I (hall only quote
a Paflage out of one oiHis Graced Sermons^
FoL I. pofi oHt. pag,i6o. * The like may
^be faid of Locking up the Scriptures,

* from the People in an unknown Tongue

* contrary to the Command of the Scri-

Jptures thcmfelves, and to iht ^xt^t'fe*^^

\ 3^ '>^^

E M4 3

f and Defign of Almighty God in the
t Writing and Publifiiing of then) ; and
f contrary to the perpetual Exhortations
' and Counfels of all the Antient Fathers
f of the Chriftian Church for a great

* many Ages, not one excepted. They ^re
; hardly more frequent, and copious, and

* earned in any Argument, than in per-
ffuading People of all Ranks and Con-
fditions, to the conftant and careful
,- Reading of the Holy Scriptures. And

* contrary to the Common R^afon and
f and Senfe of Mankind. For what (hould

* Mep be pcrfuaded to be acquainted
^ withal , if not with that which is the
f great Inftrumcnt of our Salvation ? That

* Bool? which was written on purpofe to

* reveal and convey to Men the Knowledge
f of God, and of his Will, and their Duty?

* What ihould Men be allowed to know,
f if not that which is the beft and moft
VeffetSlual Means to diredl and bring them

* to flcayen ; or turn them from Sin, and

* to preferve thenqi from Eternal MiferyJ
*When our Saviour would reprefent the
t bed and mofi effedual Means of bring-

* iog Men to Happinefs, and faving them

■ from Eternal Torments of Hell : In th6

* Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus^

* he brings in Ahtaham , giving tl^e' beft

* Advice he could to ?he Rich Man , who
J W^s in Hell • concetms, fe^vs Brethren

* who were up6rt Earth , how they mighi:

* prevent their coming into that Place of

* Torment j and he direds them to the

* Scriptures, as the beft, and moft cffedual

* Means to that Purpofe ; they have^izys he,

* Mqfes an J the Prophets^ let them hear them ;
^for if they hear not Mofes and the trophetSy

* neither would they le perfuaded^ tho one rofe
^from the dead. And now one would think,

* that the declared Judgment of our Saviour

* fhould go a great way ^ even with the
^ moft Infallible Church in the World

* However , this we muft fay , that 'tis a
*very hard Cafe to which the Church of

* Rome hath reduced Men; that it will

* neither allow them Salvation out of their
^ Church, nor the beft and ^v5ft effeduai
^ Means of Salvation whet^ tfic;^ are in it,
In which words. His Grdn has excellent-
ly difplay'd , not only the' great U(e and
Benefit of Publifhing the Bible in a
Tongue that the People underftand ; but
alfo the Reafonablenefi and Neceffity of
fo doing. Let us fee now what Plea$
M.C. and others make in Defence of th?
pontrary Practice in the Church of Rome.

And Firfi, He tell§ us, ' That X^t.TiUot^
^fonj and his Party , are of alf others the
*unfitteftto reproach the Papifts with this
^ Condud; confidering, chat n^oft of the

* Learned Men of his Church do ingc^

! ^P9«/J7 ojffl, That the Vromifc>io\xs v^S^

^^ \^

^ of the Scripture allowed to all forts of

* Perfons^and their Private Interpretations
^thereofyWas in a great Meafure the Caufe
^ pf all the different Sed^s,that fprang up,

* and divided themfelves from their Cora-
^ munion ; which is an Aflertion abfolurely
falfe ; and would become any one better,
than one who pretends to write » A
Tru^ and Modeft Account ^ ^c^

I defire him to read the(e Words of the
Archbi&op, which will make him blyfli) if
he has any Modeftylch. f(pl. IIL pag. 4^z.
" They, (i.e.) the F^f/i/j (ay, thatPeo-
*' pie are apt to wreft the Scriptures to
** their own Deftrudion; and thjit the
** Promilcuous Ufe of them,hatb beenthe
^^ great G>oar5on of Herefies. It cannot
** be deny^OtxnJ be the condition of the
*^ beft things ^i the World, that they are
** liable to be s{bufed ; Health, and Light,
" and Liberty,, as well as Knowledge.
" But muft all thefe therefore be taken
" away? This very Inconvenience of
*f People's Wrefting Scripture to their
" own Ruine, St. Peter takes notice of in
" his days; but h^c doth not therefore;
** forbid Men the Reading of them, as his
more Pfudent Succeflbrs have aqne
fince, Suppoft the Reading of the
Scriptures hath been the Qccafion of
** Herefies .- When were there ever more,
" than iq the Firft Aees of Chriftianity a

Cm/]

** and yet^either the Apoftles , nor their
** Succeflbrs ever prefcrib'd this Remedy.
** But are they in earned i Muft not Men
*^ know the Truth, for fear of falling in-
*^ to Error ? Becaufe Men may poffibly
** mifs their Way at Noon-day, muft they
" never travel but in the Night, when
•* they are (ure to lo(e it ?

** And when all is done, THIS IS
'' UOT TRUE, that Herefies have
*' (prung from this Caufe ; they have ge-
*' nerally been broach'd by the Learned,
** from whom the Scriptures never were,
** nor could be concealed. And for this,
** I appeal to the Hiftory and Experience
** of all Ages. Arid then he quotes
St. Chryfoftom^, and St. Hierome. This Para-
graph N. C. could not but take notice ofj
but I fuppofe he thought fit, ta filence the
Truth here too? becaufe it was not to hk
furpoje , of traducing Hi& Grace , and the
reft of the Learned and Reverend Divines
of the Church of England : Which tho' it
could not efcape the knowledg of any
ingenuous and confiderate Reader , yet
this, and a great deal more may be fwaU
lowed down by fuch weak and credulous
People, who too often become a Prey
to the Miflionaries of the C/^«rci[; of Rome.

I could quoce a great deal more to the
(ame Purpofe, but then I muft tranfcribe
tjie greateft part of fome of h\sS«vsNwvs\

(€

<C

C "38 ]

and therefore I (hall refer the Reader to
Sfrm. IX. Vol. IV. and FolAll. Serm. ix.
where he will find this Subjed C^s indeed
all the reft are) excellently treated on; I
fliall only make one Quotation more; be^
caufe it will (hew us the true Caufe why
the Tapifii are fuch irreconcilable Ene-
mies to the Holy Scriptures, V^l. III.

f(^g^ 483-
** Doth not our Blefled Saviour exhort

the ^evos to (earch the Scripturts ? and

St. Paul charges the Chriftians, that the

Word of 60J fl)ould dwell rfthly in them ;

** and the ancient Fathers of the Church

" frequently and earneftly recommend to

^^ the People the Reading and Study of

** the Scriptures : How comes the Cafe

- to be fo altered i Sure the Word of

God is not changed, that certainly ahidei

and continues the fame for ever. Was

^^ not the Old Teflament publifh'd in a

f* Language underftood by the People;

^^ and the Epiftles of the ^poflles by the

" Churches to whom they were written;

•' and the Go/pels both by Jews and

'f Greeks ? Were there no Difficulties

and Obfcurities then in the Scripture,

capable of being wrefted hy the unfiahle

■* artd unlearned ? Were not the People

" then liable to Error , and was (here no

** Danger of Herefie in thofe Times?

f And yet thcfe ate iVvt ?t^^\. Ob\^<9tvoas

4i

C '19 1

^^ againft putting the Scriptures into the

^^ hands of the People ? Which is juft

** like their arguing againft giving the

*' Cup to the Laity , from the Inconvcr

** niency of their Beards, left fome of the*

** Confccrated Wine (hould be fpilt upoa

** them ; As if Errors and Beards were

*' Inconveniencies lately (prung up in the

** World , and which Mankind were not

^' liable to in the Firft Ages of Chrif^iar
14 ■ •
nity.

** But, fays ffis Grace ^ in truth all their

*^ Ohgedions are leveled againft the Holy

*^ Scripture itfelf; and that which the

^ Church of Rome would find fault with,

" if they durft, is , That there fhould be

^* any fucd Book in the World , in the

hands either of learned or unlearned^

for if it be dangerous to any, none are

more ciapable of doing Mifchief with

'* it , than Men of Wit aqd Learning-

*^ And this is evident , by the Advice

*' given to Pope Julius \U. by the Bifhpps

^' met at Bononia : That as little of the

Cofpel as might be , efpecially in the Vulgar

'iongue^ fhould le read to the People; for

fc^ they , this is that Book^ which alove aH

others^ hath raifed thofe Tempefts and Whirl-

7X>inds which we were almoft carried away

vHth. And in trutf; , // any one diligently

confiders it^ and compares it with that which

is don( h pur ChurcL hi will find tbcm njerj

a

cc

c^tir

C »4o]

contrary to each other; and our Do£lrine to he
not Only very different from it^ hut repugnant
to it. *' If this be the Cafe, (as the Arch-
** bilhop goes on) they do like the reft of
^* Children of this World, prudently
" enough in their Generation .• Can we
** we blame them for being againft the
** Scriptures, when the Scriptures are
** acknowledged to be (b clearly a-
"gainftthem? But furely no body who
** confiders thefe things , would be of
" that Church ; which is brought by the
*^ undeniable Evidence of the Things
" themfelVes, to this (hameful Confeffionj
" That (everal of their Dodrines and
" Pradices are 6xxt&\y contrary to the
[[ Word of God.

Secondly , N. C fays , That the Popijb
Religion is under Persecution , in ,moft
Trotejiant Countries; that all the Marks
of Infamy and Diihonour are put upon
them , being not permitted to bear any
Civil and Military Office; nay fcarce
allow'd in fome Countries , to exercife
fuch honeft Profellions or Callings, as
may enable them to get their Bread;
That they arel rail'd at in the Pulpits by
Troteftant Minifters; and fuch fal(e and
ridiculous Tenents afcrib'd to them , as
inflame the People's Hatred , and give
them a perpetual Averfion to them and
Hi. r/iwr Religion, ^tvd tU^i v( t;lv? Tefi and

Ci4>]

Penal Laws were taken away i which fas
he fays) are the Fences and Bulwarks of the
Proteflant Religion , it would foon fall to
Pieces , and thefe Prodigal Children
return to their Mother , the Church of
Romcm

But certainly M. C. cannot be ignorant,
nor forget, what Ufage the Froteftants
have met with in Fopifh Countries, and
what they ftill undergo j how many
Thoufands of them have been Murder'd,
and fent to Heaven in a Fiery Chariot;
and what Cruelties have been prad:is'd
upon their Bodies, Eftates, and innocent
Children ; that they have been harrafs'd
with Dragoons , condemn'd to Imprifon-
ment , and the Galliesj whereby their
Lives have been rendered fo mifirable,
that a (peedy Death was much more
defirable : Theft poor milerable Wretches^
who were guilty of no Crime but
their Religion, would have looked up-*
on it as a peculiar Favour, to have un-
derwent the worft Sufferings the Fapifis
are liable to amongft the F rote ft ants.
Cruelty and Perfecution, meerly for Con-
fcience fake, is contrary to the Spirit and
Genius of the Gofpel of Love and Peace:
But {editious Pradices againfl; the State^
endeavours of fubverting the Fundamen-'
tal Laws of the Government, feducing
Subjedls from their Religion and Alle-

[ 142 ] ^

giaoce, are Crimes of Co hiack and 6ith
gerous 3 nature^ that tbey ought to be
reprefled by the Civil Magiftrate, and if
berfevcrcd in , feverely poniOied. And
fuch Crimed as the(e b^^ve been prov'd
againft thofe Pa^ifls who have {ufTer'd In
England. And as for the Teji and Penal
Laws, 'tis btit juft and reafbnable, that
thofe who depend Upon a Fbreign Head,
and have made over their Allegiance tq
another Government, (hould be excluded
from having any (hare in ours.

And fb Kttle reafon has M C. to affirm^
that the Froteftant Religion is fupported
by Perfetution of its Enemies, and by the
Preferments in our Church / that it may
with more Truth, be retorted upon the
faptfii;w\io{k Religion permits them to ac-
commodate thcnfifelves to all Humours'
and Capacities, to make ufe of pious'
Frauds, and notorious Impoftures, tofi^
hncefuch Truths as are not jot their purpoJe\
and' (if 'tis for the good of the Church ) to'
conceal even the Profeffion of Chriftianity,
it (elf,- So that from thefe,and many more
fuch inftances, 'tis very reafoiiable to eon-
clude, Itiat did the P^j^i/j but underftanrf
the Principles and Pradices of their own
Church, and was their Religion but fef
in a true Light before them, and' they
left at liberty to determine for themfelvcs f
Aat thofe who have Honeily and Judgi

C HI ]

medt fufficient to weigh aad con/klef
things, would rather cmife to be Turks
and Heatheniy than fuch (brt of Chriftians
as the Chitfc^i of Rome teaches Men to be«

Of the Inmcdtiofi ofSainls^

TH E^ Invocation of Saints is one of
thbfe Idolatrous Pradices which
we charg!e upon the Church of Rome^
whereby they fall in with the fuperftitious
Ufages of Heathen Rome^ who deify'd
their deceased Princes and Benefactors 9
and therefore when the Archbiihop treats
of this SubjecJl:, 'tis no wonder that he lays
ahout him^ (as our Author tells us) i. e.
takes a great deal of pains to convince his
Hearers of the finfulnefs of this Prac^icey
and how much they difpleafe God there-*
by, and hazard their eternal Salvation.

Of this Nl C. feems to be fenfible, and
therefore he is wonderful cautious and
wary in ftating this Article of the Popijb
Faith. He tells us indeed from the Coun«
cil of Trent^ That that which they hold to
he of Faith^ is^ That the Saints^ wha reign
with Jcfns Chrifiy offer up their Prayers for

C »44]

Men ; that it is good and prifitahle to invo-
tate them after an humble wanner^ and to
have recourje to their Prayers^ Aid andAj-
fiflance^ to obtain of God his Benefits^ thrd
our Lord Jefus Chrift his Son^ our only Sa-
viour and Redeemer.

Bur U. C. adds, * That tho' the Coiin-

* cil declares this to be the Faith of the

* Church concerning this Point, yet it

* does not cotaniand or oblige any of the

* Laity to pray to the Saints, or invocate

* them ,• that 'tis not abfolutely neceflary,

* and that the Church leaves every one at

* liberty to make ufe of it, or not : Nay,
/. 230. he abfolutely denies the Matter of
Fad, and would bear tis down J That the
fapijis only commemorate the holy Apo-
ftles^ the blefled Virgin Mary^ and the
Saints, in the publick Service of the
Church ; but ^ fays he, toe do not put up any
formal Prayers to them. Certainly N. C/s
Book was defign'd for the ufe of very weak
and ignorant Perfons, or of fuch Romanifts
as have an impticite Faith for ail that the
Guides of their Confciences fay ; other*
wife he could never imagine, that fiich
notorious Faffhoods, and evident PreVa-
rications could pafs upon any intelligent
Reader ; for tho' the Papijls give up them-
felves to be led blindfold by their (agaci-
ous and infallible Guides, yet we Prote^
ftants take the liberty to make ufe of our

Senftsy

[ i45]

Senfes^ and to w eigh things in the Balance
of unprejudic'd Rcafbn, and are not wil-
ling to pin our Faith , and the Hopes of
our Eternal Salvation , on the Sleeves of
any Guide » tho* he pretends to never (b
much InfaUibility. And therefore I (hall
take the Liberty to compare K with C
and to confidcr, whether 'tis poffible to
reconcile thofe Inconfiftencies he is guilty
of; for certainly nefver any Man had a
better Title to that Charader of Martial^

itemo efi tarn p r ope ^ tarn pnculiiue fiiii

Well then, N. C. tells us, that the Church
of Rome doth not command or oblige
any of the Laity to Pray to Saints ; but
doth not their Church command the
Laity to join in their Publick Worftiip,
and are not the Prayers of the Saints a
Part of their Publick Worftiip ? This he
Gonfefies, but tells us , ^ That in the Pub-

* lick and Solemn Service of the Churchy

* (excepting the Litanies of the Saints^

* which are read or fung folemnly four

* times a Year; the General ConfelTion of

* Sins in the beginning of the Ma(s, a few

* Hymns , Anthems, and Verficles , read

* only once a Year ) they put up no

* Prayers to Saints or Angels. What tri-
fling is here ? Would it not be more in-
genuous and becoming an honed Man, to

K \0\

C <4<S ]

tefl the plain Tfuth, without ^lencing an^
part of it ? Let mc therefore ask him
ihis Plain Qucftipn , Do not lA^^apifls
Pifay ta Saints ? Yes, this he tells us in
the begintting of this Chapter^ tho' he
denies it in the latter part of it. Doth
not the Church oblige the Laity to be
pttktA at the Publick Worftiip ? This he
cannot detty. Are not thefe Prayers part
erf thisir Daily Service, and particularly
the General Confeffion > this is evident
Nay b not this one of the Articles of
their Creed , without the Belief whereof
none can he fav* ei^ that the Saints ought to
be ihvccated and worfliip'd ? This is
cteafj beyond all Queftion* And if fo,
why (Hduid they endeavour to cover,
What they cannot poffibly conceals
Would it not be much better to confefi
the Truths and reform their Liturgy , ra-»
ther than th perfid in foch Pradices as
they themfelves arc afham'd of, efpecially
if xi (bail appear , that this Pradice is
downright Idolatry ? And this wHl be
very evident , from thofe Diftourfes His
Grace has made upon this Subjetft; and
then N. C. muft acknowledge, that he had
good reafon to lay ahout him.

Now to make Proof of this, I (hall
confider what His Grace has faid on this
SubjecJ:, And firft, he quotes Colojf.x^
i2, 19. where ^ Afofilc (ays^ i^tt ntr

Man beguile you of your reward^ in d votun^
ian humility an A wor (hipping of Angels^ not
holding the head. Which Text is the more
i-emarkable ^ becaufe the Apoflle feems to
have faid the(e Words, that he might meet
with that plaufible ^ but irrational Excufe
of the Papifts^ of fraying to Saints j That
they think it more decent to pray to
Saints to offer up their Frif)r^// to God,
than t6 go to God diredly ; For as 'tis
ufiial to be introducM Into the Prefence of
Great Princes by fome Favourite^Courtier;
ind inferior Subjexils never approach the
Throne, but by the Mediation of fome
Officer or Attendant; fb they think it
Would be Infolence,to offer up our Prayers
4rtd Praifes diredtly to the Glorious Ma-
jefty of GOD, without the intermedi-
ate Interceflion of fome Angel or Saint.
This is an old, tho' plaufible Ercufe, and
therefore the/^^(3'y?/?exhorts thQColoffiansnot
fbbebegaird thereby; and tells them that
rtofe who under this Pretence of a Vo-
luntary Humility, addrefs^d themfelves to
Angels, fhbuld lofe the Reward of their
Prayers , (/ e.^ God woulcj not hear them;
atid that they did not hold the Head,(/.^.)
they adled contrary to one of the Fanda^
^dntal Principles oi the Cbrifiian Religion ;'
which teaches us to Pray to God alone, in
ttie Name, and for the Sakie of our Bleffed
ibord attd SaVidur, Jefus Chritt.

To this NX; anfwers * That th6 Word
* Worjhip is us'd in Scripture and in coifi-
mdn Difcourle^ not only to fignify the
Supream Worlhip and Honour, we pay to
Almighty God,but alfb all fortof Refped
and Reverence done to Kings,Princes,and
Perfons of Condition. That of this we
have many Examples in the Holy Scri-
pture; and not only fo , but the very
Word, which we uft to fignify the Su*
pream Worlhip due to God alone, iS
fbmetimes apply'd to Humane Affairs;
the fame Expreffion being us'd in Latin
to G^^ and our Parents^ 'tis colere Deum^
and colere Parentes; but tranflated dif-
ferently, to worftiip God, and to honour
our Parents. So that the Scripture will
afford us fufficient Grounds for Worfhip-
ping and Invocating not only God,
Angels and Saints , but even common
and ordinary Men.
This is true indeed,but nothing at all to
the purpofe; for 'tis certainly that Sti-
pream Honour and Worflbip which is due
to God , which we Proteflants fay , and
prove too , that the Papifts give to Saints
and Angels; orelfe'tisa Worthip fo very
like Divine Worftiip , that we know not
how to diftinguifti between them. For 'tis
evident , that they offer up to them the
Sacrifice of Prayer and Thankfgiving j and
that for this very Reafon, becaufe they

took

look upoa them to be Interceflbrs be-
tween God and Man ; a Worfhip which is
only due to that (ble Mediator of the
Second Covenant, our Saviour Jefus Chrift.
And that the Words bear this Senfe,
Theodoret tells us in his Comment upgn
them, who affirms, That we muft fend
up our Thankfgivings to God and the
Father, by Chrift, and not by Angels. In
which Words, the Worlhip of Angels by
offering up our Thankfgivings and Pray-
trs to them, is evidently decry 'd , without
any kind of trufting to their Merits , as
U.C. would bear us in hand. For tho' the
Church of Rtme tells us of a Treafury of
the Merits of the Saints, which indeed is
properly fo call'd , becaufe it has brought
an inexhauftible Fund of Wealth into the
Topes Coffers; yet I never heard of any
Treafury of the Merits of Angels, till N. C.
difcover'd it,* or, if there was any fucb^
that it was defign'd for any part of St. JPe?.
ters Patrimony.

Jhis is alfo evident from that Canon of
the Council of LWir^ j, which enjoins, Tbat
Cbriftiaiti ought not to jorfake the Church of
6odf and go away from it^ and to Invocate An-
gels^ and to wake Conventicles^ aU which are
forbidden. If therefore any be jound giving
kimfoilf to thisfecret Idolatrf^ let him be Ana-
thema i becaufe heMth forJiAen the Lord Je^
fiu Cbftijl the Son af God, and is gone over to

C «5o ]

Jdalatry. And that by this fecret iJoUtry
in the Canon, is meant Prayer or Invoca-
tion of Angels, is plain from the Words of
theodoret^ when he quotes this Canon, in
his Comment on the Third of the Cp/a/.
fianij verf. 17. where he tells them, fhat
hegaufe feveral Hereticks did cemmand Men
to Worfhip Angels^ be enjoins the ca^tyary ;
that they fhould adorn both their Words ani
ASiions with the Memory of the Name of
Chrift their Lor di and fend ye up ( faith
he) thank/giving to God and the Father by
him, and not by Angels. And then (peaking
of the Canon of the Council of Laodicea^
he adds: Which in purfuance of this Rule^
and being delirons to Cure that Old Di/e/^^
made it a Law, that none fhould Tray unto.
Angels, oj^ forfake our Lord Jefiu Chrifi.
Which lets us into the true Meaning of
that other Sentence which N.C. quotes
from Theodoret ; viz. We do not addrefi our
jelves to the Saints as Gods, but we pray unto
them as Divine Men, that they would phafe
to be Intercejfors for us : i. e. We defire
tlie Saints or holy Men, to intercede with
God for us in this World; but we do not
ynake Gods ot them , by Praying to them
after they are departed this Life. Tbefc
things being confider'd, J think His Gra^^
had Rea(bn to he warm^ Q as W. C. ^xpf e(^
reshimfelf} when he difcourfes on thefe
Matter? of fo qear In?portance ; and h««

aiad9

C »5» ]

made ufe of (b mudi Arguioent , as well
as Rbetorick, chat N.C. will >never jbe abje
CO gain(ay it ; tho' he may go on to Pre-
varicate i for which, I pray God ht may
obtain Pardon in this World, lell it fljoufld
be too late to ask it in the next

Secondly^ His Grace r>eafonsc£iQS : That
'tis evident from the nature and K9^on t)f
the ching it felf , that t^iere can ibe but
one Mediator and Interceffor in Heaven, who
offers up our Prayers to God ; becaufe un-
der the GofpeJ there being but one {^igh-
Priefl, and but one Sacrifice once ofief'd
forSint and Inter ce^on for Sinneri^ beiqgi
founded in the Merit and Virtue pf t^e
Sacrifice, by which expiation for Sie is
made, there can be no other Mediator
of Interceffion^ but he who liath iQade ex-
piation of Sin by a Sacrifice offered .to God
for that purpofe, and this JefiisChrift on-
ly hath done ; he is both our jHiRh-Rrieft
and our Sacrifice ; and therefore he only,
in the Merit and Virtue of that Sacrifice
which he offerM upon Earth, can inter*
pede in Heaven for us, and ofier up our
Prayers co God, and procure the Accep-
tance of them ; for that can only be done
in virtue of a Sacrifice firft offered, and by
him that offered it, this being the^pecu-
liar Office and Qualification of a Mediator
and Interceffor^ properly fo called. And
this ^fiis Qrme 'Prove; at large from the

Epiftle to the Hehrevos^ which feems chief-
ly defign'd to make good this Truth.

To this N. C. replies, and acknowledges,
^ That 'tis true, that Chrifl only has a right
^ and title to mediate and intercede for us,
, * becaufe he alone paid the Ranfom and
^ full value of our Sins , and therefore
^ may in Juftice ask of his Father to for-

* give us ; but tells us, that we ought to

* di(lingui(h between an Intercefion found-
^ ed in Juftice and Equity, and an Inter-
^ ceffion{oxxr\dtd only in Favour and Good-
^ will, Q.e. if I underftand him right,)
thai tho* Jefus Cbrift alone has received
Power and Authority to obtain of God
the Remiflion of our Sins by virtue of
his Merits , yet the Saints and Angels ,'
out of their great Love to Mankind, may
entreat and befeech him to do the fame,
and are permitted by God 0:^ to do.

But fmce this Inter cejfton is founded
neither in Juftice nor Equity, but in meer
Favour, therefore 'tis but realbnable that
there ftiould be fome plain Revelation to
confirm us in the belief, arid engage
tiS x6 apply our (elves to the Pradice of
itt For till God has told us fo^ we
have no reafon to conclude, that God
will confer this Favour upon Saints and
Abgels i efpecially fmce he is not oblig'd
feither in Juftice or Equity {o to do. God
has 0nfer't| this Honbqir upon hi« only
^ be-

L'nl

begotten Son j and made him the only
Mediator between Mankind and Him-
fclf ; he fent him into the World for this
very purpofe; and our Saviour was
pleafed to take upon himfelf our Nature^
that he might be capable of this Media-
torial Office ; and, why fliould we think
that God will make Saints and Angels
Partners with him, or give this Honour
to any other? Has he given us any in*
timation of this in the Holy Scriptures >
or 9 Has he any where enjoined us to ad-
drefs our (elves to thofe inferior Deities i
or, Have wc the leaft hint of any fuch
Pradlice in the Firft Ages of the Church >
or , Is not our Blefled Saviour (ufficient
to hear all our Prayers , to retain the
Senfe of all our Wants, and to offer up to
his Father all our Petitions and Thank&
givings? This N. C. was fenfible of, and
therefore he owns, that the Saints and
Angels cannot be term'd Mediators and
fntercejfors in the fame Senfe in which
Chrift is our Mediator ; but they are calfd
to in a lower and improper fenfe, becauf^
they pray to God for us.

But this Anfwer is very much be-
fides the purpofe; for His Grace doth
not blame the Papifis for making the
Saints Interceffors in this improper Senfe^
i. e. by praying for us ^ but becaufe
tl^ey would have ttiem to be (b in ft

C *J4 ]

4Erae aad proper Senfe » and tiereby id^
jMBch upofi Chrifl's Mediatorial Office,
wiio alone Jias unde«caben to offer up our
Prayers and Praifes unto <£Qd, and by
vktue of bis owtQ MeritSf to fender them
;)cceiptable unto hioi. And tberefore we
|t$me no Tieafon <to take if.C's word|
wkui be teUs^s/Xbat whether the Arch-
^ l^iibop ic;ails tthem Ina^ejfors m « proper
^^r {improper Senfe, 'tis aU one to jiim,
'iiace His Gr^ acknowledges, tbey do
^ ficay ibr 4is, wd iniftceJk with (Qod in
^onr-bebatf, be is &tisited, for be is^fike
^ daie ?4fifti defire no more jof us. Wbar,
no jnore diaa our li«nethf en upon Ear tfa <»n
ilp ? They can pray to God for »s, and
inteutJk on OQr bebailf, -but they fcannqc
.d&r up our Prayers CO XSod, and^procufe
Abe Acceptance of thenp : dut 4^bisi and
inore, the Tapirs ro^mre of the Saints,
iAnd .therefore,

ThirMy,^ file ArcbbiftK)p rbad good rea-
^40 find «fi(9lt w<ith t^e Bi(hop ixiM€(ms\
Cf^pofibion of the I>0i3:ri(ie of !the Rmtfk
Chwofa, whem ^ iteUs us. Thai they j^ray
fo the Saints in Heaven^ in jthe {ame arJer
c^ JBrtOiberJy Sme^ with which we CMireat
Aur Br^iifTW ^ftsm e^arth f€ fran for ms. fm
tbis is jm !a true jRtcprQfeoiCatiQn of tbatr
I>0(3rine, w will !^pear ii^ ffcbef^ ^r
\9wm% GodfiderAtipes,

I. 6e>-

I. Becaufe they pray to the Apgjekand
Saints in Heaveni with the fame ftdeoiQ
Cijrcumftances of Religious Worli»py that
they pray to God I^imfelf.

X. That in their Prayers and ThunkC-
givings,they join the Angela, and the tBI^(^
led yirgin^ and the Saints, together, wttb
GodandChrift.

*jf That in the Creed of Pope fm IV.
it IS expredy (aid, That the Saints vMcj?
reign mith Chrifij are to he Vforfiifpd m4
InvQiAtei.

4. That in the PttbUck <Mc^ of the
Romifh Church, they do not only pray to
the Saints to pray for then), hut they lii-
reiS; their Prayers and ThankfgiWngs kn?
piediately unto them^ for all thofe fidef-
iings and Benefits whidi th.ey ask of God,
land thank him for.

To which N", C. replies, * That there qe-
^ ver was a Book more unirer&lly com-

* mended and approved in the f^atin
*; Church, than the Bifliop o{ Mmupc^ Ex*

* pofition of the Dodlrine of thoCathoIick
^ Church, that the Fofe^ and QardiwaU^
^ and Ctmjfijlqryy approved of it, &!c. Sq
^ that to fay, this Expofition is not a true
f Reprefcntation of the Dkxarine andPfir
^ dice of the Roman Catholick Church ip t^
^ matter,i$ as unreafonable in it £elf,as it i$
f injurious to that Great and Learned PnS'-
^ late, and to the whole CathaUck €htrch^
I which hath approved it. Tlxls

C"5<]

This is Co high an Encomium of the
Biftiop oi Meaux (who is certainly a very
de(brving Perfbn) that Infallibility it felf
could not lay claim to a greater ; and 'tis
a thoufand pities this Learned Prelate was
not choftn Pope^ that the Tapifts themT
felves at lead might have had an Infallible
Judge to determine all thofe Controverfies,
which abound amongft them, and to mol*
lifie their hard Tenents to a (enfe as near
as poflible to the Proteftant Faith. We
(hould be very willing to take him at his
word, and the Popifh Faith upon his cre-
dir9 if we had good reafon to believe it
would pafs current j but 'tis very fufpi-
cious, that thoft who are very good C^
theHcks in Protefiant Countries , according
to the BilhopofAfe^^xsExpofition, would
in (bme Popijh Countries be burn'd for
Hercticks.

But whatever Opinion N. C. may have
of the Biftiop of MeauXy yet there are o-
thers who think, that at lead in this par-
ticular, BeSarmne [underftood the Do-
drine of the Romifh Church as well as be:
And from this Great Champion of the
Rowijb Caufe, we may learn, That the^
Saints which reign with Chrifi in Hea-
ven, are Gods by Participation, (/. e.
a fort of inferior Deities, fuch as the Hea*
thens fiippos'd their Mediators to be,} and
that therefore we may flee to their Aid

and

C'57]

and Help, as well as to their tnterceffian

and Prayers. Upon which, tlis Grate V

makes this Reflexion, ' That certainly^

^ either Bellarmine hath raifed the Saints

Sn Heaven too high, when he makeft

* them Gods by Participation ; or the

* Bifhop of Meaux hath funk them too

* low, when he thinks they are to be
^ treated and addrefs'd to, in the fame vr^^
^ Jer of Brotherly Society with mortal Men

* here upon Earth. But to come to the
matter in hand :

Fir ft y The Archbifliop proves, that the
Bilhop of Meaux mifreprefeiits the Do«
(^rine of the Romijh Church ; becaufe the
Tapifls pray to Saints and Angels in Hea*
ven, with the (ame fblemn Circumflan^^
ces of Religious Worfliip, that they pray
to God himfelf, in the fame Place, and
the fame humble Pofture, and in the fame
religious Offices and Services, in which
they pray to God, which is never done by
any to their Brethren upon Earth.

To which -A^. C replies, * That the

* Fapifts addrefs no Prayers to Saints or

* Angels in the Publick Service of the
^ Church, but that all their Prayers ;are
^ direded to God only ; and as to their

* Pofture in the Church, or at their pri-
^ vate Devotions, whether kneeling, or

* (landing, or bowing, they declare their
I intention is . to aidore God alone^ and

t '58 1

^rirone elfc. Whrth is fo grofly andfo
evidently fal/e, that: I fhall not miftruft
my Reader's Judgment fo far, as to jmia-
ginc he can be in any dan^ of being
imposM upon thereby : For 'tis evideorji
thit they do not only addrefs themfelves
to Satints and Angels in their Religious
Worthip} butalfo that

%. IThey join the Angefs, and the Blet
fed Virgm, and the Saints together, vf^ith
God ind Chrift in their Prayers add
Thankfgivings , as if (to ufe their own
IHtafe) // were in the [ante order of Bri-
iherly Shcretf^ and as if they were all e-
qtiaHy the Objeds of our Invocation and
Piraife J nay, they do not only in their
Pubhcfr Oflices join the BleflTed nrgh, '
with Gtrd and our Saviour, but fofifietimeS
pot her before her Son, and fay, Let Ma'-
ff ond her Son hrefs ui ; and nothing ii
ntore freiquent in their eminent Vfrirers,
thin to join them together in their Doxo^
logies and "thankfgivings , Glory be to
6ody and the Blefed Vitgin , and Jefuf
Chrifl y (ays Gregory dt Valtntia^ Aitd
Beliaryifiine himfelf concludes his Di^u-
rations concerning the Worlhip of Sainrs,

in thi^ very words, Praifele to God^ and
to the Blefed Firgitt Mother Mary, like-
toife to Jejus Chrift, the eteffi'd Son of the
eternal Fathrry he Traife and Glory 4 And

m the very RmanMfd [t&ifythtf make'

[ »59 ]

Confcffion of their Sins, to God Almighty,'
and the Biefled Virgin Mary , to St, Mi-^
chael the Archangel, and to all the Saints.
And irt their Abfelution , they join toge^
ther the Palfioa of ow Lord J^ Chrijf^
and the Merits of the Dlefled P^irgin , anti
of all the Saints , for the RemilSion of
Sins.

To which NIC. replies, *Th4t 'tis true

* the Papijis do join God and the Saint*

* together ih thft ftihe brtath , and that

* they are taught by the Holy Scriptures

* Co to do ; of \»^hich he gives us (everat
Inflances, as \ Kings y 12.18. Tht^ people
greatly feared the Lordy and Samuel. A€tSf
I y. 1 8. Itfeennedgpodio the Holy Ghofi^ana
to m. I Tiiti. 5. zf . / charge thee before
Gody and the Lord Jtfm Chrift , and the
eie£t Angels. R?ev; i . St. John writes to the
Stwtri Churches in J/ia; Grace h untoyott^
and peace from hint which is , and which was^
and which is to come j and from the feven
Spirit 5 y v^hich are before his throne ; and
from Jejw Chrift. i Chron. 29. xo. The
congregation blefftd the Lord God of their
fiithers; and bowing their heads ^ worfhifd
the Lord and the King.

But lione of thefc Inftances come up to
the Point; for the Archbiftiop doth not
blame then only for joining God and the
SaiAts together in the fetne Breath , for
there is no faariii in this y iittt becitife thiey

[i<5o]

thake God and the Saints Joint-Objeds
of Divine Worfliip .• They do not only
mention their Names, and bow down to
them at the fame time , but they pray
unto them for the fame things, and ad-
drefs themfelves to them in the very fame
manner; So that there is no means to
diftinguifti the Worlhip of one from the
other. And as for the lafl: Inflance , 'tis
not evident from the Text , that they
iowe^i down to God and the King at the
fame time ; for in the verfe before > the
King commanded the People to bow
down to God, which they did ; and then
made their Obeifance to the King : And
from thence can only be concluded, that
the fame Word is applied to both A&s,
tho' with different Degrees of Honour.
And now let me put N. C in mind , that
the Riomifh Church in general , and him-
(elf in particular, has very great need to
take back again the good Counfel he
gives to the Archbi(hop ; and to weigh
and confider well, what fort of Worfliip
they offer up to God j * and not to exhi-
^ bit (uch Ridiculous Scenes, (to u(e his
^ own Words) as make the Religion of
* "Jcfus Chrift^ a Theatre of Laughter and
^ Sport : For , GodwiUnot he mocktdi

3. In the Creed of Pope Tins IV. *tis
exprefly faid , That the Saints which reign
together with Chrifi^ are to he worfhif^d and

invocatedi but this they will not aIIo\^
to be done to our Brethren upon Earth.

But N. C. is pofitive. That this is only
to he under fioood in the fame Order of Bra^:
iherly Society^ in which we voorfhip and.
reverence our holy Brethren on Earth , . upm
account of their Tiety and Virtue^ and in
which we intreat them to Pray for lU:
But if fo , why doth he not give, us the
Reafon why the Council of Trent grounds
the Invocation of Saints , upon. their
Reigning with Chrift in Heaven? .For
this /hews , that this iVorJhip and Invocd*
tion of Saints muft necefiarily be fome-.
thing more,- for otherwife this Reafba
would be frivolous, if the fame thing may
be done to our Brethren upon Earth. Nay
this Council admoniOies us, ad eorum Ora^
tioneSj Opem^ Auxiliumque confugere; to fly:
to their Prayers, Aid , and Help .• And
in the Catechifm which was made by Or-
.der of that Council, we are taught. That
^tis lawful to ask of the5aints, that they
would have Mercy upon usj and the
Reafon is given , becaufe they are very
Merciful. And if fo, where lies the dif-
ference between their Prayers to God,
and to the Saints > If 'tis neither in the
Matter of them, nor in the Form, nor in
the Reafon of them: If we Pray to
them for the fame Thing , and in the
fame Form, Have mercy upon us; and .our

Prayers to the Saints be grounded on the
fiime Reafon, that our Prayers to God are,
namely, becaufe they are Merciful. Where
then is the Di€erence between them ?

Let us confult the Publick Offices of the
Church of Rome , and we (hall find, that
they do not only Pray to the Saints^ t^
Tray for them ; but they direcft their Pray-
ers and Thankfglvings immediately to
them, for all thole BlelTings and Benefits
which they ask of God , and thank him
for.

To which RC. anfwers^ by denying
the Matter of Fad:; and fixes it as an in-
delible Mark of Infincerity on the Arch-
biihop ; that he affirms it^ and endeavours
by Foul Play ^ as he calls it 3 to uphold
a finking Caufe : Nay he challenges any
Man to find fo much as one fingle Prayer,
either in the- iW/^/ or fir ^i/i^ry, which is
directed to Angel or Saint, for all thofe
Benefits and Bleflings which we ask of
of God, and thank him for ; And fays,
That that Prayer to the Angels which His
Grace inflances in; viz. Deliver us y we
iefeech you^ hy your Commancf^ from aB our
SinSy is not to be found in the PubUck
Office of the B/eJfe^ Virgin ^ annexed to
(he Breliiary.

But all this is but quibling and banter.
For doth not he himfelf contefs in two or
three places of this very Chapter^ that in

the-

the Litany of the Saints, and in the Gene-
ral ConfeflTion they do pray to Saints?
Do they not pray to St. Michael^ Holj
Michael^ defend us in Battel^ that we perifh
Hot ifi the dreadful judgment > And as for
that particular Paflage the Archbiftiop
quotes , he cannot deny that 'tis in the
Office of the Blejfed f^irgin , tho' he cloth
not find it in that Office annexed to the
Breviary. And here I cannot but ftand
amazed at the Infmcerity of the Popijb.
Friefts ; Infincerity (hall I call it j 'tis a hard
Word indeed , but not hard enough for
thofe who would bear us in hand ^ that
they do not Pray to Saints and Angels ;
and that only (^ as they would have it}
they defire theni to pray for them ; when
not only their Private Forms of Devotion
are ftuff'd with fuch Blafphemous ExpreA
(ions, as would make one's Ears tingle
to hear them , ( and yet they do not ute
any Means to fupprefs them ; ) but alfo
their Publick and approved Forms of
Prayer abound with many Inftances , of
dire(9: Invocation both of Saints aqd An-
gels. For is there not in the very Brevia-
ry itfelf, reftor'd according to the Council
of Trent^ and authorized by three feveral
fopes^ in the Feaft of the Ajfumption of
the BleQed f^irgin^ thefe Words ; Fouchfafe
to let me praife thee^ Holy Virgin , a^^d
give me Strength again^ my Enemies ^ \^

iifie not intreated, to loofe the Bands of the
Guilty J to give Light to the Blinds to drive
a way our Evils ^ and to (hew herfelf to he
a Mother ? Or, as it is in the Mafi-Book^
Printed at Taris^ 1634. By the Authority
of a Mother^ command the Redeemer :

O foelix Puerpera,
Noftra pians Sdelera ,
Jiire Matris impera
Redemptoril

Which I find tlius rendred into Englifh:

Sweet Lady^ Mother of the Son^
Who hath all our Sins foredone;
Out of thy Mother spvwer J we pray the'i^
Command thy Son for to obey tbee.

This certainly is riot to pra) to her^ to
pray to God jor us; but to pray her to
order and conimand him what he (hall do
for us. In a word , they pray to Her for
Turity of Life , and a fafe ConduSl to Hea-
veh. And in the Feaft of St. Maria de
Nives ; To help the Miferahle^ to flrengthen
the Weak^ to comfort rhofe thai Mourn^ atid
that aU who celebrate her holy Fejlivity^ may
feel her Affijiance. Thus in the Hymn to
the Holy /^poflles^ they befeech them, to
command the Guilty to be loofsd from their
C'Ailt\ to heal unfound Minds y and to increafe

theh

their Virtues ; that when ChriA Jhall comey
they may he Partakers of Eternal Glory. Nay
they make the Virgin Mary to be much
more merciful than our Redemer himfelf;
for thus prays Pope Innocent lU. in thp

/jfymn of Chrift and the Virgin :

«

Precor te^ Regina Co^li ,
Me haheto excufatum^
Apud Chrift urn tuum gnatutp;
Cujus iram pertimefcQ^
Et furor em expavefco.

Theft Inftances may fuffice , for the prcr
fent, only for a Tafte of the Sincerity of
thefe Guides 5 who would bear us down,
and think it a (Irange thing, that we will
not believe them , and take their bare
Words for it ,• That the Church of Rome
doth not require of any one, nor pracfJife
any more , than to Pray to the Saints^ to
Pray for them. But fuppofp this Was fo,
yet,

4. The Archbifhop urges, . That thus to
Pray to the Saints at ill Times , in all
Places, and for all (orts of BlefTings ; doth
fuppofe them to have the Incommunicable
Perfections of the Divine Nature inherent
in them, or imparted to them ; viz Omni-
potence, Qmnifciencq, smd Omnipre-
ience.

la this Argument, N^ C. confefles there
ijs great Difficulty, and that he mud be at
(bme Pains to anfwer it; and I think fo
(00, and that he mud: take a great deal
more Pains than he has done in the former
Part of his Book, to effeca it.

Well then , in order to do this , he I^ys
down thefe Grounds.

F'trft^ That Saints and Angels can un-
derftand our Thoughts and Prayers at the
greateft diftancci, as well as if they were
prefent with us; and that being Pure
Minds , there is required no proximity of
Place, to converfe with us.

Secondlyy That God Almighty is able to
reveal in an inftant all the Defires of our
Hearts, and Prayers to them.

And be but fo good natur'd, as to give
him theft ConcefiTions to fet his Foot up-
on, and then he will foon move this
Weighty Argument , which otherwife I
fear will be too hard for him.

For how doth it appear, that Saints and
Angels underftand the Thoughts of our
Hearts, and the Defires of our Souls ? I
^m fure the Holy Scripture tells us , that
God alone is the Searcher of the Heart;
and if fo, how^an they know theiii at a
diftance ? But much more diflScult will
it be to explain , how they can difcern
the Thoughts of a thoufand Perfpns, in
different Places, at the f^me Time, with-

out

C '67 1

out partaking of that Omnifcience, which
is an Incommunicable Attribute of the
Divine Nature.

But being beat from this Hold , I fup-
pofe he will fay; *' That tho' the Saints
cannot hear all our Prayers, yet God can
reveal them to whom he pleafes; and then
there will be no neccffity, that we ihould
attribute the Divine Perfections to them.

But not to difpute what God can do,
where doth tf. C. give us Co much as the
(hadow of a Reafon to prove that he will do
Co > Nay 'tis highly probable that he never
defign^d it; becaufe he has conftituted ^
Mediator on purpofe, to receive our Pray-
ers, and to make them an acceptable Sa«
crificeunto him, thro' his Merits and Me*
diation. And as His Grace reafons , * If
' the Saints mud have a Revelation from

* God of our Prayers, before they know

* what we pray to them for i then the

* (horteft and fureft way is to pray to God,
^ and not to them.- Or however, Qzs
^ BeOarrnine confefles ) it were very fit to

* pray to God , before every Prayer wo

* make to the Saints, that he would be

* pleas'd to reveal that Prayer to them j

* that upon this Signal and Notice

* given them by God , they may betake

* themfelves to pray to God for us«But unlefs

* it were very clear from Scripture, that
I QocJ bad appointed this Method ; it is iq

^ Reafon fuch a way about , as no Maa
would take that could help it .- And it
feems to me, to little purpofe: For
Avhy (hbuld not a Man think God as
ready to grant him all his other Requefts,
without the Mediation and InterceJftoH
of Saints, as this one Requeft of reveal-
ing our Prayers and Wants to them ?
And, if this way be not thought fo con-
venient, I know but one more, and fhat
is, to pray to the Saints to go to God,
and beg of him that he would be pleas'd
to reveal to them our Supplications and
Wants^that they may know what to pray
to him fof in our behalf, which is juft
fuch a wife courfe, as if a Man fliould
write a Letter to his Friend that cannot
read, and in a Poftfcript defire him, that
as foon as he had received it, he would
carry it to one who could read, and in-
treat him to read it to him.
Laflly^ To addreft our felves to Saints
and Angels, is to be guilty of the fame
Idolatry xhQ Heatl/ens were, who worfcip'd
God by innumerable Mediators, by An-
gels, and the Souls of their departed Prin-
ces and Heroes.

To this N. €. anfwers, * That in order

• to remove this Difficulty, we ought to
^ take" a view both of the Character and

* VVorftiip which the Heathen^ gzvc to their
^ Pagan Saints, and (ee whether upon the

ther

* Cornparifon, the Chriflian Saints be in

* any thing by us treatied like them.

Firfl^ As to their Charadler, -A^. C. telk
us, * That the Heathens gave thefc Saints
the Attributes of the Supream Being,
that they were guilty of all manner of
Lewdnefs, Intemperance, and Debauche*
But the Chriflian Saints are of ano-
er Complexion J The F^^i/?^ (he fays)
give them none of the Attributes of the
trut God, that they were the Inftruments
of God in working Miracles, and that
all their Sufficiency is from God j and
that as to their Lives, they were holy
and pure, which makes their Charadier
as different from the Fagan Saints , as
vyhite is from black.
Secondly^ As to their Worfbip ; * The
Heathens wor(hip*d their Gods, or Pa^
gan Saints upon a falfe pretence of their
Power and Greatnefs in Heaven ; whttre*
as there were no fuch Saints. But we ho-
nour and refped: the Chriflian Saints, be-
caufe we are warranted by the Word of
God, that they are fuch as we reprefeni;
them. The Heathens ereded Altars tq
their Gods ; but we make Altars for
none, but one God only. They offered
Sacrifice to all their Gods and Saints^
which is the chief Mark of SupreanS
Worlhip ; but we offer Sacrifice only to
[ the true and living God, as Malice

C »7o 3

t

felf cannot deny. They made ldol$;
and believ'd that their Gods came and
dwelt in them ; but we only put up in
our Churches the Images and Pidures of
Jefus Chrifl the living God , and of fuch
as we are fiire are truly Saihts^but do not
worlhip them for their own fakes, or be-
lieve there is any Divinity in them, but
that the Refpedl which we (hew them is
to be refer d to the Originals , namcfy,
Chrijl and his Saints. So that upon the
whole, the Dodor might as well refem-
ble Sea to dry Land, as the Worfliip we
give to Chriftian Saints, to that which
the Heathen paid to their Heroes or
Saints, as the Dodlor calls them.-
This is what N. C fays in defence, or
rather to palliate that Idolatrous Worlhip
which the Church of Romegwts to Angels
and Saints j and yet, after all he has laid
to this purpofe, if we will take the pains
to confider it, we-fliall find, that one E^
is not more like another, than the Popifi
Saints are to the Heathen^ as has been
made out beyond Contradidion, by ft-
veral of our Learned Protefiant Writers,
'Twould be too long and tedious a task
to draw an exadl Parallel between them ;;
and therefore I (hall only make a few
plain Remarks on what N. C has faid ^
which may be of ufe to the lefs curious
Reader J referring the Inquifm ve^ for far-

%^e^

C tr. 3 -

thcr fatisfaAion, to thofe juft Treatifes
which have been publifli'd on this Sub-
jed.

And^ Firfiy M. C. tells us, * That the

* Heathen gave their Saints the Attributes

* of the Supream Being ; but the Papifis
^ do not impute to their Saints any of the

* Attributes of the true God.

What he means by the Heathens giving
their Saints the Attributes of the Supream
Being, I cannot well tell; and indeed,
there is fuch an impropriety of Exprefli-
on runs thro* the whole Difcourfe, that
(unlefs N. C. is a Foreigner) 'tis unpar-
donable in one who pretends to fo much
Reading and Learning, which I the rather
remark, becaufe I have been frequently
obliged to tranfcribe his very words. But
I fuppoft, by the Heathens giving their
Saints the Attributes of the Supream Be-
ing, he ftiuft mean. That tho' the Hea*
thens did generally believe that there was
one Supream Being, yet they attributed
to their infcriour Deities, or Pagan Saints,
thofe Divine Perfedions (fuch as Omni-
potency, Omnifcience and Omniprefence)
which were the incommunicable Attri?
butes of God; But the Papifis do not
think their Saints have any o\ thoie inhe-
rent Perfections, but derive all their Powe?
and Sufficiency from God.

But, Firfiy \is evident, That tfao' the
Heathens did worfhip the Sun, Moon, and
Stars, their Heroe's and Benefadors, and
departed Princes, as an inferior (brt of
Deities, yet do we not find that they at-
tributed to them thofe Divine Perfedi-
ons which were originally inherent in the
Supream Being. They worihip'd the Hoft
of Heaved^ fuppofing the Stars to be ani-
mated with Divine Underftandings ; and
they look'd upon the Planets as Mediators
between God and Men ; and that they
were all inhabited by fuch (piritual Intel*
ligences, as were of a middle nature be-
tween the uncreated and created Beings :
And as for their Heroes and deceased Prin-
ces,they acknowledged them to have been
mortal Men, who for the Benefits they
did Mankind, and for their Wifdom, were
made immortal Deities, who had the Go-
vernment of this lower World cdmmitted
to them. And as they were inferior in
their Nature to the Supream Being, fo
thofe Perfedions , they were pofTeft'd of,
were of a lower Kind, and only Streams de-
rived from this Fountain.

And jufl fuch fort of Beings do the Fa*
pifis hold their Saints to be i an inferior
(brt of Deities to whom the Supream Be-
ing communicates the Tranfadions of this
lower World, and gives them Power and

^fficacy

Efficacy to help thofe who pray unto thcmj
and devoutly worlhip them*

Secondly J If. C. fays, * That the Hea^

* then Saints Were guilty of all kinds of

* Licentioufhefs arid Debauchery, but the

* Cbriftian Saints are pure and holy Beings,

* Men who laid down their Lives for the

* Truth of the Chriftian Religion.

But this is nothing to the purpofe ; for
the Charge of Idolatry will lie upon eve-
ry one who pays Divine Worfliip to a crea-
ted Being, tho' never Co good, tho* tlie
moft perfeA Saint, or the moft glorious
Archangel ; _ for the Qjieflion is not con^
cerning the Quality of the Objed of our
Worihip, but wHether our Worlhip is
fuitable toits Objedl?

And as for the Romifh Saints, 'tis cer-
tain, that they were not all endowed
with thofe good Qualities /f. C. fb much
glories in ; fome of thofe whom the Pcpe
has thought fit to make Saints, were not
the beft of Men, as Thomas Becket. and
"Raines Clementy and Ignatius Loyola him-
felf. Severaf of their Saints are very pro-
bably thought to have been only the Pro-
diidl: of (bme Poet, or Painter's luxuriant
Fancy ; as Time is painted like an Old
Man wing d with a Scythe, and Jufiicc
with a pair of Scales ; So St. Chrifiopher
arid St. Margaret were only Hieroglyphi-
t^\ Reprcfcntations of the different State

[ y4 ]

of Chriflians in this World ; the one be*
lag only the Reprelentatido of a Chrifiian
palling over a Land-flood, carrying ^efui
Cbrift on his Back, who did burthen him,
but yet conduced him ; the other oi a
Woman attacked by the Devil, but gain-
ing the Viiftory, and trampling him un-
der her Feet. And generally of all their
Saints,therc are fuch fulfbme Stories told,
fo inconfiftent with any (hew of Truth,
ai are fufficient to diCparage thofe which
are beftattefted ; and tho' the bare rehear-
fing them would Teem too light and ludi-
crous in a ferious Difcourfe amongft ?ro-
teftants^ yet are they firmly believed in
Fopip? Countries.

But, Thirdly^ N. C. tells US, ' That there -

* is a great Difference as to the Worfhip of

* them ; the fieathen Saints were worfliip d

* upon account of their Power in Heaven

* who never were there. And may not this
be (aid of feveral of the F(?/>iy3& Saints too?
The Heathens ereded Altars , and offered
Sacrifice to their Saints ; and do not the
Tapifls do fo too ? Do they not offeif up
unto them the Sacrifices of Prayer and
Thankfgiving, which certainly are more
acceptable to the Supream Being than any ,
other SacrificeS(^ can be ? The Devotion
of our Hearts muft needs be a more pre-
cious Offering than any outward Sacri-
ifice; and therefore St. At^&in fpeaking of

[ »75 ]
the Sacrifice due to God, makes ouir
Hearts the Altar , and Chrift our Pried,
and our Prayers and Praifts offer d up
to God by a fervent Charity , to be a
true Sacrifice. So that Q to ufe the Words
of a Learned Prelate , ) 'tis evident. That
on the fame account that the Heathens
did give Divine Honour to their inferior
Deities , thofe in the Church of Rome cfo
fo to Angels and Saints : For the Hea^
thens made a difference between their Sacri-
fices to the Supream God, and to thdr in-
ferior Deities and Heroes ,- (b that if the
putting any difference in the way of Re-
ligious Worftiip doth excufe the one, it
mufl do the other alfo. Did the Heathen
ufe folemn Ceremonies of making any
capable of Divine Worfliip ? So does
the Church of Rome. Did they fet up
their Images in Publick Places of Wor-
ihip , and kneel before them , and invo-
cate thofe reprefented by them? So does
the Roman Church. Did they confecrate
Temples , and trtdt AJtars to them, and
keep Feflivals , and burn Incenfe before
them > So does the Roman Chiircb^
Lafilj , Did they offer up Sacrifices in
in thofe Temples, to the Honour of their
lefler Deities and Heroes ? So does the
Roman Church. For Bellarmine reckon-
ing up the Honours belonging to cano-
nized Saints, befides thofe before- men-

doned, reckons Up this as one, That tfre
Sacrifice of the Eucharift , and of Lauds
and Prayers are piiblickly ofFer'd to God,
for their Honour.

Laftby N.C. fays, they do not call the
Saints Gods ; but this is nothing to the
purpofe i for if they worfhip them as fucfi,
if they offer up to them their Sacrifices,
Prayers, and Praifes, they do rtiuch more.
For the Name of God is attributed in
Scripture , ro thole w^ were no Gods;
but the Worfliip of God tannot be given
to any Created Being, without being
guilty^f the fame Idolatry the Heathens
formerly were j and I think this is
very evident, from what his been al-
ready faid,

I (ball clofe up this Chapter with that
Remark , which His Grace makes at the
end of the Third Sermon of the Second
yolume, Publifh'd poft Ob. That this Pra-
dice of Praying to Saints was firft Efta-
blifti'd about the Eighth Century; at the
fame time with the Wor(hip of Images,
and when the firft Foundarion of Tranfub-
ftantiation was laid : And as they began
at the fame time , (b it is very fit , and
'twould conduce very much to the
good of the Church, if they were taken
away together.

Of

L'ttI

Of IMAGES.

THERE were two forts of Idolatry
the Heathens were guilty of, both
of which we charge upon the Church of
Rome. Firfly That they give that Divine
Worfliip to Saints and Angels , which
ought to be given to God alone. Secondly^
That they worfliip the true God by vifible
Symbols and Reprefentations , fuch as
Images are. The firft I have treated of in
the former Chapter^ the other I (hall make
theSubjecSt of my prefent Enquiry.

Now N-C. tells us, that the Council of
Trent declares, That the Images of Chritt^
of the Virgin-Mother of Goa^ and of all
other Saints are to he had^ and kepi , efpe-^
cially in Churches^ and that due Honour and
Refpeil is to be given them : IJot that we
believe any Virtue or Divinity to he in them^
for vohich they ought to he worfhipd; or that
we fhould ask any thing of them ; or put any
truft or confidence in them , as was formerly
done hy the Gentiles^ who put trujl in Idols;
hut hecaufe the Honour due them , is refer d
to the Originals , which they reprefent. So
that hy tbofe Images which we kip^ and he fort
vohich we uncover our Heads y and how down^

M V5 1

C '78 3

toe adore Chf ift , and reverime the Saintsi^
tohofe Itkinefi they hear.

This is that Sta^p of the Cafe the Coun-
cil of Trent has given us, tho' t very con#
fus d and partial one : For it only def-
dares , that we mud give due Honour to
ihe Images of Chrift and the Saints, but
what th^t due Honour is, it doth not deter-
mine; nor doth it diftinguifh between
that Honoyr which is to be given to' the
Image of God, and that which is to be
given to the Image of the Saints ; or whe-
ther both alike .• Jhefe were fome parts
of the Truth, which the Council thought
fit to Jilen<;ei and are Difficulties fo abftrufe,
that they could not be determined by
Infallibility itfelfj and yet 'till they are'
determin'd , the Decree of the CotrnciF
^bout the Worlhip of Images , is infl gnifi*
^ant, and to no purpofe.

Htowever taking this Dodlrinb in the
grofs^ we have one Plain and General
Argument againft Worfliipping of Images;
becaufe Q as Hk Grace tells us) this'
Dodrine is as point-blank againfl: the
fecond Comraandmisnt , as a deliberate
atid malicious killing of a Man, is agirinft
thefixth.

To which ff. C. replies ; ^ That if
^he meatis by Worfliip , to gi\^e thtt
^Supream Worship and Adoration to Im*-
* g^s , which is due only to God , lie is

V9ty

^ very much in the rights and I hope he (hatl
'never be contraditSked by me. Bat if he un-
*derftands by fVor/t^ip^ to gWe Images th^i
' Honour and Reffe£l which is due to things;;

* that reprefent 'Jeftis Chrifl and his Saintsfji*

* he is contradi<aed by Scripture, by all An^;

* tiquity, and even by his own Church. Sd/
that he would have us believe, that the
Papifis do not give any Divine Worfliip at
all to Images, but only that Honour and,
Refpccft which is dye to thiftgs whicH
repreftnt '^efus Chrifi and his Saints. .

But that this is a falfe Reprefentatioflf
of the Pradice of the Papifis^ will beconie
very plain, by confidering, ,? .

Pirftt That the Papifis do riot only mate
Images of the Saints, and jefus Chrifi^ as
Man, but of God himfelf ,• and this If. C,
tells us in plain terms: ji^e^ fays he, ma^e
only the Images and Pi£l tires oj the true God^
and the Saints^ Pag z65', and this is (o!
commbaly pradis'd, that they do not only
place them at the beginning of their Bibles,
but they hang them up for Sjgti^, at their..
Doors and Innsj fothat I ha\)'e heard of
fome who travefd in Italy, that they have
lodged at the Trinity ^ and ft t their Horfes
at God s Head: This is a Pra(9:i<:e fo ridicu-
tbully prophane, that one would not men-,
tion it , were it not to fhame them out o^
their Impieties. , . . . _ ,i,

; x/y, They giye the fame Worlhip to tJxSk^
Images, a5 they do to t1\Qret\vvtt^^Ni\iv05\

[i8o] .

thofe Images reprefent , ^ and therefore to
the Tm^ge of God they rnufi give Supream
Worlliip and Adoration. For fmce Qzs
they tell us ) the Worlhip they give to
Images, doth not terminate in the Image,
but in that thing of which the Image is
only the Reprefentation; and as the
Council of 7r^»^ f^ysy The Honour done to
them J rejers to the Original they reprefent;
and that hy lowing down and worfljipping
tbem^ they adore Chrift and God. Therefore
they muft give to the Images of God and
Jefus Chrift^ Supream Worlhip and Adora-
tion*

But, fay the Papifisy ' We do not give

* this Divihe Worihip to thefe Images,

* (which are. only Stocks and Stones, the

* Work of Men's Hands) as the Heathen
*did,- but we give Divine Worlhip unto
*God, by and in thefe Irpages; we pre-
*flrate our (elves indeed before them,

* but God alone is the ultimate Obje<9: of

* our Worfliip.

But pray let me ask N. C. one Queftion
or two : Do they give any Worlhip or
Honour to the Image it(tlf,by which God
is reprefented ? And if Co , Is it that Wor-
fhip which is due to God , or an Inferior
fort of VVor(hip ? An Inferior fort of
WorfliiD it cannot be; becaufe the Coun-
cil of Trent tslls us,l hat all Honour dene
to Images, is refcr'd to the Original which

they

[>8>]

they reprefent ; and therefore fince thefe
Images repreftnt God, the Supream Wor-

t fliip due to God, is by them given to thefe
Stocks and Stones, as they tell us the Hea-
thens formerly did , which is the grofleft
Idolatry in the World.

This., I think, doth naturally follow
from thoft Principles which the Papifis
make Profeffion of. But however, fince
they generally difclaim the Paying of any
Divine Worfliip to the Images themfelves,
we will in Charity grant them fb much,
and admit their Plea ; That they only
Worftiip God in, by, or thro' thofe Images
and Reprefentations which they make of
his Divine Being- But yet this being ad-
mitted, it will do them very little Service.
For 'tis evident, That this Worfliipping of
God in, by, or thro* any Vifible Reprefen-
fation, is diredly contrary to the Second
Commandment

Now the Commandment itfelf is very
plain in this Matter; and (p plain, that
we can hardly imagine how it could be
fet down in more intelligible and exprefs
Terms. Yet to put it out of all Queftion,
Mofes himfelf gives this Explanation of it;
Levit. x6. 1. For^ (ays he, you fhall not wake

you any Idol or graven Image , neither rear
up a ft an ding Image ; neither ft) all ye fet up
any Image of Stone in your Landy to how dov^n
to it ; jor / am the Lord your GoJf

Ma tq^

To which the fapi^$ reply, • That the

* Word tranflated f Imagt^ ought to be rep- .
^AexAldol; an J that 'tis tranflated by the

* Seventy^ by a f Word of the (ame Signifi-
^ tatioo ; and that then this Conimand-
^inent will be levell'd againft the idola-

* trous Pra(3:ices of the Heathens ^ who

* wprfhip'd the Images themfel ves , ind

* nc>t. againft thofe Chriftian$ who obly
« worfliip Ood by and thro* them.

Buf this Shift will be of no u(e to them,
becauie 'tis^lain, that the Word which irt
this Commandment is tranflated Iwage^
in the proper fignification of it, doth de-
note any * Image which is carv'd, or cut
out of Wood or Stone • and thus 'ti$
gienerally rendered by the LXX , at leaft
forty times; and but tljricc otherwife'.
J/I^nd as for this particular place, 'tis evi-
dent it ought to be rendered Ima^e here,
bec^ufe Vis e^plain'd by a f Word that
follows, which fignifies any likenefs or
fimilitude whatfbever. We are forbid not
only th^ niaking graven Images^ but alio
the likenefs of any things ^c

But farther, That this is the true Senfe
of the Cpmmandmentjwill appear from the
Reafon which is given of this Law,
Which the Scripture informs us was dci
iriy'd from God's fpiritual and incorti-

■vwr'a*

iPefe!. ■\ '£:ii''i>hQV. ^Tk-j'TrToV, fXheJliuna.

C >«} I

prefaMflble Natait i for as ffis Qnte aiv
gu6«, ' Becttufg dod is a Spirit^ thurefore

* we are fiot to lifcen him to iiny thiiig
^ which is coft>oifeiil ; we are Hot to r6-
' prefect him iy the Ukenefs tf mh^ thiiig

* tbst is in Heive» aidve , i. e. of ally

* Birds f pr in the Birth henedth, i. e. of

* any Beafts ; »r in the Wdters un^itt the
^ Earthy i. e. of any Fiih. For as the Pro-
' phet tells us, there is nothiog that we

* can liken God to, ffa. 40. 1 8. To wbem

* win ye liken Ged i or ^ What likewefs vtil}
' ye compare unto him i We debaie his f^i-
^ ritaal and incorruptible Nature, When

* we compare him to corruptible Crea>

^ tures, Horn. i. ax, 13. St. Faul (jJeakiiig

* of the Heathen Idolatryj who frof effing

* thethfehes wife^ hcaMe fools ,* 4na changed

* the glory of the incOrtUptihle GoJ^ into at$

* Inline made like to corrnptihli Mdn^ And

* to Birds, and to four footed Beafis, and

* creeping things^ fays. They became Ftols j

* i.e. This is the Folly of Idolatry, tO

* liked a Spirit , whidh hath no bodily

* Shape, to thi^s that are corporeal and

' corruptible. ^ that however fbme ar6
' pleas'd CO mipce the matter, I cannot

* fee how the Chufch of RomCy which wor-

* Ihip^ God by or towards fOme tmage Or

* (enfible Jleprefentatiort, can be excus'd

* from Idolati'y j and the Chureh of Eng^

* land dotl^ qot, without juft caUfe, chal*

- [ >84]

' leoge the Rcwi/h Church with k, and
* make it a ground of Separation from
^ her. And fince we Chri/iians under the
Gofpel, have clearer Difcoveries of God's
(piritual Nature than the Jews ever had,
we (hail be far more une^cufable^ if we
do not ofTer up to him a more (piritual
Worfliip. And if Perfedtion of our Chri-
ftian Worftiip doth confift in the fpiritua-
lity of it, that it is the Worfhip of our
Souls and of our mod devout and fervent
AfFeic3:ions, how can it be imagined, rhat
an Image (hould contribute any thing
to the raifing the AfFedions ? Will not
fuch a Worlhip by vifible Reprefentati-
ons, rather incline us to entertain low
and mean Thoughts of. God, and bring
down our Ideas of him to the Figure
and Lineaments of a Man ? And if the
befl: li/eas or Notions we can frame of
God, are unworthy of him, and infinite-
ly below the Excellency of his Nature,
how careful ought we to be, that we
do not imagine him to be fuch an one,
nay, worfc than our (elves > And to this
purpofe, when this Commandment was
enforc'd on the People of Ifrael by a
particular caution, Deut. 4. 15-, i6. Jake
ye therefore heed to your felves^ left ye
corrupt your f elves j and make you a graven
Image ^ the fimilitude' of any Figure ^ (§*c.
the ground of that Caution is- exprefs'd

in

[•8?]

in thefe Words, For ye faw no manner of
fimilituJe on the Day that the Lord /pake
unto you : Which evidently (hews, that
God will not be worfliip'd by any man-
neroffiniilitude; for otherwife, he would
have appeared in that fhape or likeneft to
them, if he had thought it agreeable to
the Excellency and Dignity of his Na^
ture.

But that the worfhipping God by an
Image, is not lawful ; nay, that 'tis down'*'
right Idolatry, is evident from feveralln-
ftances recorded in the Holy Scripture.
I (hall inftance in that Calf which Aaron
made in the able nee of MofeSj and tho(e
which Jeroboam fet up in Dan and Bethel;
the worihipping of which , is generally
agreed to be Idolatry : That the Worlhip
ot the Calf which Aaron made was Idola-
try, is evident from i Cor. lo- 7. where
the Apoftle exhorts the Corinthians^ Mei^
ther leje Idolaters j as were fome of them^
as it is ufritien ; the People fat down to eat^
and to drinky and rofe up to play ; that is,
that their celebrating a Feafl in honour of
this Calf, was Idolatry; And this Text
is the more remarkable, becaufe the Apo-
ftle here exhorts Chriflians to take care
that they were not guilty of the fame
Crime , left they (hould incur the fame,
or more grievous Punifliments. And that
this Idolatry did confift in worOiipping

IJkt true Qod by this vifible Re^re(fedct-
tioA^ is ss evideot, becauft in cither of
thefe Cifes, 'tis incredible that the If
ratlites fl^ould (b foon have fomot the
true God, afld that when the Golden Calf
was ftt up, ExoJ. 31. 4. they cried out,

This is thy God, Iffael, who irought thee
put 9J the Land tf Egypt $ ani Aattn huilt
tfH Altar before it, an4 made ProclaniatiM,
and /aid, To mrrop is a Feaft U the Jeho-
vah, or the Lords Now the Name Jeho-
vah '\% never attributed in the Holy Sciif
pture to any but the true God. And to
cloft up all, the Burnt* ofTerings, and PeaCe-
pfferings, were the fame which God in the
Law comtTianded to be offered up, a Bul-
lock and (even Rams ; the ottering of
which, was the greatefl; Affront imagina*
ble to the Religion of the E^ptians, as it
evident from Btcod. 8. 1 6. From this and
a great deal more, which might be faid
on this Stibjed):, it plainly appears, That
the worifaipping God by ait Image, or vi^
fible Reprefentation, is that Idolatry which
the Children of Ifrael were charg'd with,
and guilty of.

And therefore I (hall only ftrengthert
l^nd confirm what I have raid by one Ob'
ifervatlon more ,• That even that Idolatry
which the Heathens were guilty of, Wa$
the fame with the jews, and that which
|s the crying Sin <jf the Church of Ro:Kifk

C '87 3

lit this Day. For there were few qF theuqi
fo foolifli and ftupid as to believe , that
thofe Stocks and Stones which they
worfliipp'd, were the Gods who created
^the World) or that the Leeks or Onions
which they planted, were the fupream
Deities j no , this extravagant Idolatry
Is peculiar to the Church of Bpnie ; fir£^
to adore their God, and then to cat him :
3ut the Heathens treated the meaneft pf
their Deities after another manner.

fqrruw & Caipe pefas violare^ & A^^^^ff
mor/u.

Tho' they declar'd as the Tapiftf do, That
their Images were Symbols or Reprefen-
tations of that Being to which they gave
Divine Worlhip; and that none but a Fool
could think otherwife of them, as * Cel^
fits declares. That they never thought
their Images to be Gods, or to have any
Divinity in then?, but what only comei
from their Gonfecration to luch a ufe ;
and,as f 5'^ Auftin tells us, that thro' thefe
Images they worflhip'd the Deity. More-
over, fays * Ma^monidesy as to what con^
icerns Idolaters, you know that none 0^
them worfliip the Idol with this Opinion,
as if they thought there were no othet

^ Apud Origen, /. 7. ?. 37 J. tSt. Auftin. Tom. 8. in
pfal. 1 1 J, ^ Rifore NeYOCJub. cb. 3<^. ' '

i

[188]

God but that : Nay, there never was
any Man » nor will there ever be , who
can fancy to him(elf , that the Figure
which he hath made of Metals^ Wood or
Stones, created the Heavens and Earth,
and governs them : But they worfliip
them, inafmuch as they look upon them
as Things intermediate between them and
God, And to name no more, "Julian tells
us, We do not think them Gods, but that
thro them we may worfliip the Deity ;
for we being in the Body, ought to per-
form our Service in a way agreeable to it.

But may feme (ay, If the Heathens did
not make their Images the ultimate Ob-
jecSls of their Worfliip, why then do the
Scriptures fo often accufe them for ado-
ring Stocks and Stones, and for paying
Divine Worfliip to Devils ?

To which I anfwer. That they are
juftly accus'd for worfliipping all thefe, be-
caufe they made them either the Media-
tors between them and the Supream Be-
ing, or the Mediums by which they of-
fered up their Worfliip, and hereby tranf.
ferr'd the Worfliip, due to God alone, to
the(e Idols, as the Papijts at this Day do.

Well, but Z^. C tells us. That even Pro-
teflant Writers , and fome Learned Men
in our Church, do allow, (ome Honour
and RefpecSt is due to the Images of Chrift
and the Saints ;and he inllances in the inr

:enuoQs

genuous Author, as he frequently Calls him^
of the Anfwer to the Bifhip cfMeaux^ who
fays, ' We will honour the Relicts of the

* Saints, as the Primitive Church did f we

* will refpecSt the Images of our Saviour,

* and the Blefled Virgin ; and as (bme of
^ us now bow towards the Altar, and all

* of us are enjoined to do fo at the Name

* of JefuSj fo will we not fail to tedifie

* all due Refped to this Reprefentatioo.

To which I anfsver, That Images are
either fuch as reprefent God, and thefe
are utterly unlawful to be made, or fold,
or expos'd to publick View ; or elfe, fuch
as reprefent fbme vifible Being ; and thefe
we may make, and are ufeful, as Orna«
ments to fuch Places, where they afe not
abus'd to Superftition or Idolatry : But
even thefe cannot lawfully be worlhip'd
with any fort of Divine Worfliip, nor any
that comes near it, or gives any reafpn-
able caufe of fufpicion of it, (nor doth
that Learned Author allow of itj becaufe^
as God himfelf gives the Reafbn in this
Commandment, Go J is a jealous Go J; for,
as he forbad the having any other Gods le^
fiJes himfelf in the Firlt Commandment ,
becaufe he is the Lord our God; fo iq the
Second , he forbids the Worfhipping of
Images^ becaufe he is a jealous God ; fb
that tho' the F^/)iy?i do not pay Divine
Worfliip to their Images, yet if their £]es
are after their Idols ^ if they k\{s vVv^vcv^^^^

r*

i

I '9°1 . . ,.

pdW c^dwn vnto them ; a jealdos God will
iicver fuffer fuch Teftimonies of Kindnefs.
God will not be infov*d by their Diftin-
^ions o( Relative 9 Inferior, and Iippro-
per Worihif) , by whic^ they may prove
either Side of the Qpeftion jf and anfwer
this , as fbme of the Church of Rome in
ScotUnd did the Qpeftion, Whether the
ihe Loris Frctfer might he ufed t» the
Saints ? That ultimately^ principally^ pri^
inarilj^ an&firilHyy they might not; hut fe^
eoniarifyy Itfi printipally and largely ^ and
telatively they might i as Bilbop Andrews
tells us. Anj}». to Piron , pag. ^g^ But
to return into the Way from whence we
fiave diverted j His Grace tells us , That
the moft Learned Men in the Chufrch of
kome do acknowledge, that they 1^ un-
der the juft fufpicien , and probable
Charge of Idolatry ; becaufe they give
this Reafbff, \yhy the Worfhip of Images\
sind the Invocaifioh of Saints departed,
were not pracSlis'd in the Primitive
Church , for the Firft Three Hundred'
Years. * That ihe Primitive Chriftians did

* then forbear thofe Pracfliccs, becaufe they^
*. (e€m*d to come too near to the Heatherl
^ Idolatry , and left the Heathen fhould

* have taken occafion to juftify themfelves,

* if thofe things had been pradlifed among

* the Chriftians : And they cannot now,

* be ignorant, wh^rScandal'they give bj^

C <9t ]

^ thcfe Pradices both to fews and Turks ,
and how much they alienate them from
Cbriftianity by this Scandal : Nor caa
they chufe but be fenfible , upon how
great Difad vantage they are^ in defend-
ing the(e ^radices from the Charge of
Idolairy : And that by all their blind
DiftiricSions, with which they raife fuch
a Cloud and Dull, they can hardly make
any plaulible and tolerable Defence for
themfelves j againft this Charge : Iril
fo much , that to fecure their own Peo-
ple from difcerning their Guih in this
Matter , they have been put upon that
(hameful Shift of leaving out the Second
Commandment in their common Cate«
chifms and Manuals; left the People^^
feeing Co plain a Law of God againfl fb
common a Pradice of their Chiircb,
(hould upon that Difeovery have broken
off from them.
Now to this lafl Charge of leaving out
the Second Commandment, Nl C. anfwers.
Firft^ By denying the Manner of Fad; and
(ays , * That 'tis to be found in hundreds
*of Manuals and Catechifms , in England
^ itfelf; and that he has by him a Ma«
^nual and Catechifm^which has this Com--
^ mandment in it, in the fame Form as it
^is in ours; and then breaks out into'
this intemperate and unbecoming Excla^
mation : NoU) ^ Ma0 ( be means the

C »9^]

Afchbifhop^who can difpence with hisHonouf
and ConfciencCy fo far as to Pulli[h from tht
PreJS and Pulpit ^ Untruths fo eafify dif.
cover^d^ what Paradox way not he undertake
to maintain ? Theft are hard Words in-
deed, and one would think, that before he
had givert a Perfon of the Archbilhop's
Figure^fuch Rude and Scurrilous Language,
and the downright Lye ; he Ihould have
been well aflur'd that he was on the right
fide of the Hedge,and that what he afErm'd
was true; led the Bolt which he (hot u[t
fijould fall upon his own Pate. For what
was it that the Archbiffiop Publifh'd from
the Prefs and Pulpit ? Was it , that thef
Papifts had no Catechifms and Manuals iff
which the Second Commandment was in-
serted , efpecially in England ? This he
dares not affirm. Or is it not true , that
Papifis do frequently leave it out ? This is
evident , and that in (bme of their Ma-
nuals they mangle thebi fo, that one can-
not tell what to make of them , nor czrt
the People reap any Benefit by themr
Of this kind , the Reverend Mr.Spinckes
in his Learned Anfwer to the Propofals for
Catholkk Communion , gives us an Inftan.ce
of one which he has by him ; where after
the Firft Commandmentj^ the reft are in^
ferted thus: x. Thou (halt not tnake.
J. Thou (halt not take. 4. Remember that
thou keep^ &c.^

But

But Secondly^ he fays, That what we call
the Second Commandment ^ is in truth part of
the Firfij and prohihits nothing but what th}
Firfi prohibits ^ the having 6r worfhipin^
Hiore than one God. But is not the having;
and the worfliiping more Gods than one,
two different things ? Befides, there is no
Shew of Reafon for dividing the Tenth
into Two diftincS: Commandnients , and
making tlie Ninth to be , Thoti /halt not
tovet thy Neighbour i Wife; and theTentb,
Thou fhalt not covet the other ?offeJfion$
if thy l^ei^hbour^ as his Houfe^ bis Servant.
For Firft , Our Saviour refer'd the Look-
ing upon a Woman to Luft after her , td
the Seventh Comniandment : And Se^
condly , Mofes , in the Twentieth Chapter
of Exodus^ reckons the Coveting of the
Houfe firft , and then of our Neighbour'^
Wife. So that if this Diftindion had been
genuine , the Ninth Commandment muft
have been included in the Tenth, which is'
not reafbnable to fuppofe.

I think there is but one thing more,
^hich N. C. fays upon this Head, which
deferves to be taken Notice of • He can-
not gainfay^ but that there are notorious
and fcandalous Abufes in the Worfliip of
Images in the Church of Kdme ; but he doth
riot think it reafonable, that the Abufe of i
thing (hbuld be urg'd as an Argument againlt
the Ufe of it: Neither indeed ought it^

l'94l

unlef^ where th^ Abqfe of it is fo flagrant;
and univetfal , ao{I of more pernicious
Confequence than the taking away of the
Ufe qf it can be ; This was the true
Caufe of Hezekiah's dcftroying the Brazen
Serpent; not that the People Sacrificed to
it, and made it a God , as N. C. tells
us , which no one can reafonably ima-
gine of the Jeivsy who had been fo long
train'd up Ifi the Knowledge and Worfliip
of the true God ; but that they made this
the Vifible Symbol of WprQiiping the
Invifible God ; and paid that ipivine
Worfhip to it, and by it, which is due
to God alone.

And thus the Tapifts are juftly charg'd
with worfhiping a Crucifix^ as is evident
to any one who will give himfelf the trou-
ble to look into their Miflal ; where there
are fb many Paflages to this Purpofe, that
r cannot imagin with what Face N. C
could contradic^i what that Learned Au-
thor of the Afffwer to the Bilhop of Meaux^
affirms concerning it. I fliali only tran-
fcribe a Paflage or two. In the Order for
lileffing a Nev^ Crcfi\ after a folemn Con-
iecration oi it, by Incenfe, Koly Water,
and Prayer J the Rubrick direds. That
the &iiihop kneeling before tlie Cr^y?,fliould
devoutly adore and kils it. And in the,
Order for the Solemn Reception of an Em--
pcrory that the Crofs (hall be carried on
t . the-

the right fide of the Emperor's Sword j^
becaufe Latria^ Q i. e.') that fort of Wor-
fhip wfifch is particularly due to kU
mighty God, is to be given to it. Tis
eafie to give an Hundred more fuch In-
ftances as thefe ; and particularly, that in.
that very Place, 'tis Adoramus earn , Qi. e,^
C;rucem; Let us worfliip the Crofs^ Which.
N. C. muft needs know, and be very well
apprized 6f : And therefore by that fe-
vere Sentence, which he (b rudely and un-
juftly.pafles upon the Right Reverend Au-
thor of the Anfmr to the BiQiop of liiiaupc^
he muft be condemned ; it being very evi-
dcnty That tho N. Cprofejjes himfelf to he
Jo great a Friend to Sincerity and Truths yet
he manifeftly fwerves from both in this Pointy

••'I • lii

N ?; Of

IV96']

Of TVKGJ'tORt

IN dating this Article of the Pop/J^
Faith concerning furgatory^ KC. is
very cautious , becaufe he is (enfible that
'tis burthen'd with fuch Diificultids , that
no tair Account can be given of it,- either
from Scripture, or Reafbn, or the Pradice
of the Firft Ages of the Church. And
fierein he follows the Steps of the Coun-
cil of Tre^t ; which declares only , that
the Souls there detain J ^ are helped hy the
Trayers of the I^aithful\ but efpecially ty the
acceptable Sacrifice of the MafS: But doth'
not determine what fort ot Place Purga*
tory is, or what manner of Pain Souls en-
dure in it; or whether they are purged by
Material Fire , or by other Terrors and
Anguiflies of Mind ; Thefe were Diffi-
culties too knotty to be loos'd, and there-
fore both the Council and N. C. wiftly paft
them by ; but tells us , ' That this Do-

* drine in General is founded in Scripture,

* and in the Antient Pradice of the Church ;

* And that Praying for the Dead , which

* was Pradis'd in the Primitive Church, is
^rfn unanjivtrahle Af^nmen? to i^XOV^ ^ that

* they believed Purgatory loOo

[ « 97 ]

ThU he affirms indeed, with an Air q(
Aflurance peculiar to hitnfelf ; but how-
ever we have no Reafon to take his Word
for it, tecaufe he has fo often broke it al?
ready. And therefore I (hall confider what
His Grace has (aid on this Subject ; and in
doing (b, I (hall return a fufficient An-
fwer to N. C. 's manfiverahk Argument.

And, fir/?, His Grace affirms^ That thfi
Dodrine of Purgatory is not founded in
Scripture, nor can be prov'd from it ; and
that fome of their own eminent Men do
acknowledge that it cannot.

To which N". C. anfwers, That he has
producd two Paflages from the Holy
Scripture, and ,can produce many more
which plainly prove it ; and therefore he
thinks he may fafely tell the Dodor, he
is miftaken. And becaufe the Archbifliop
has not quoted any of their Learned Men^
who fay. That Purgatory cannot be prov'd
fronj Scripture, therefore he takes it for
granted , that he knew of none who do
fty fo.

The two Texts of Scripture which hp
quotes^ are, firft, Matth, 5. 25, 26. Agref
with thy Adverfyry quickly^ vohilft thou art
in the w^y with him : left at any time th^
Adverfary deliver thee to the Judge ^ and the
Judge deliver thee to the Officer^ and thofc,
(fe cafi into P^ifov. Verily^ I fay unto thee^

C >98 ]

thou fialt not come out thence till fhou b^Jl
paid the uttermoft farthing.

Thefe Words are {poke by our Sa-
viour, to fliew of what ill Coafequence
'tis to harbour and indulge a malicious and
$n uncharitable Temper ; as wyH appear
to any one who reads thp former part of
the Chapter ; and tlierefore he cx'hoKs
his Hearers to agree with their Adversary
quickly^ vohilfi they are in the way wi4h himj
i. e. to be reconciTd to thofe with whom
they have any difference ; efpecially tbofe
they have wrong'd , whilfl they are tra-
velling on in this World,lefl the Adverlary
commence his Suit againfl: ihenfi, and they
be caft, and then the Judge will ddiyer
ihem to the Officer, i. e. the Devil, who
is the Executioner of God's Vengjeance,
and they be caft into Hell, from whence
there is no Redemption , they Jhall never
depart till they have paid the utterwofi jar--
thing. And that by the utterrnofl farthing
is meant Hell, and not Purgatory, is plain;
becaufe the Faftfts themfelves grant, that
thofe who are guilty of damnable and
mortal Sins, do not go to Purgatory, but
to Hell .• Now this uncharitable Tem-
per, againft which our Saviour forewarns
liis Difciples, is confefs'd on all hands to
to be a damnable Sin without Repentance ;
tind the Parable fappofes, that the Man
did not repent of it, becaiufe he did not
'' '^ ?^eci

L ^99 1

agree with his Adverfliiry whilft he was in
the way, i. e. in this Life. Nor do the(e
words, That he /hall not cotre out till
he has paid the uttermojt farthing, denote,
that he may pay the Debt which he owes,
or that there will be a time when he fliali
be reJeasM from his Torments, as is evi-
dent from a parallel Place, Matth. 18. 34,
where our Saviour fays. That the Lord of
that Man who had dot companion for his
fellow Servant, delivered him to the Tor^
mentors^ till he fioulA pay all that was due
mto him ; now that he could never pay
this Debt is plain , becaufe we are told^
yer. %^. that he had not to pay.

The other Text which N". C. quotes;,
is I Cor. ^ . 1 o, 1 1 , &• c* According to the Gracp
pf God which is given me^ as a wife Mafter^
huilder^ I havi laid the Foundation^ anddfno--
ther huildeth thereon ; but let §Dery Man
take heed how he huildeth thereupon. For
other Foundation can no Man lay^ than that
rphicb is laidy jefus Chrifi. How if ahy
Man build upon this Foundation^ Gold, SiL
ver^ precious Stones^ Wood^ Hay^ Stubble^
every Mans Work (ball be made manifefl ;
for the Day /hall declare it^ becaufe it fhall
he reveal d by Fire , and the F'^re /hall
try every Man^s fVork of what fort it is.
If any Mans Work abicle^ which he hath
built thereupon, he /hall receive a Reward,
if any Man's Work fhall be burnt^ he (hall

fuffcr lofs , yet he hmfelf (hall he favd,
yet fo as fy Fire-

The meaning of which place, His Qracf
gives us in thefe words ; The Appftle here
fpeaks of a fort of Perfbns, who heJd in-
(deed the Foyndajioq of Chrifti^nityj but
built upon it fuch Dodrines or Pradice?
9s would noi: bear the trial; which he ex-
prefles to us by WpoJ^ Hay^ affJ Stulhky
which are not Proof againft the Fire, Such
a Perfon, the Apoftle tells us, hath brought
himfelf into a very dangerous State , thp
Jie would not abfolutely deny the poflibi-
jity of his Salvation ; He hmfelf fhall h^
yiuV, yet fo a^ly Fire.

'Tis evident, That by /vr? here, is not
fiieant the Fir? of Purgatory, as fome pre-
tend, becaufe the Particle of Sirpilitude,
{jp^ plainly (hews, thj^t the Apoftle did
not intend an Efcape out of the Fire lite-
fally, but fuch an Efcape as Men makp
out of an Houfe, or Town, that is on fire ;
efpecially, fince very Learned Perfons of
the Church of Rome do acknowledge, that
Purgatory cannot be concluded from this
Text ; nay, all that Eflins contends for
from this place, is, that it cannot be con-
cluded froni hence that there is no Purga-
tory ; which we never pretended, but only
that this Text doth not prove it.

It is very well known that this is a Pro-
verbial Phrafe, uled not only in Scripture,

bui

^)ut in prophane Authors, to fignifie a nar-
row Efcape out of a great Danger ; He
Jhall hefavd^ yet fo as ly Firey S'lx larvQ^i
put of the Fire ; juft as S'CvS'ix^l^ is ufed,
I Pet. 3. 20. where the Apoftle fpeaking
of the eight PerfoDs of Noah's Family, who
efcaped the flood^h^cr^^wcf^pS'fiS'o^Q^^they
efcapedqut of the Water. So here thisPhrale
is to be rendered, He himfelf fhall efcape^
jet fo as ly Fire- The like Expreffion you
have, Amos 4. ii . / have phclcd them as
a Fire brand out of the Fire. And, Jude 13. ^
Others fave with fear^ plucking them out of
theFire. AH which Expreflions, fignifiq
the greatnefs of the Danger, and the diffi-
cyhy of efcaping it; as one, who when
jhis Houfe at midnight is fet on fire, and
being fuddeniy wak'd, leaps out of his
Bed, and runs naked out of the doors, ta-
king nothing that is within along with
him, but employing his whole care to fave
his Body from the Fljimes , ok St. Chryfo^
flom upon another occafion exprefTes it.
And fo the /?i>W»* Orator (who it is like-
ly, did not think of Purgatory} qfeth this
Phrafe, Qt4o ex JuAicioy velut ex incendio^
nudus effugit ; irom which Judgment or
Sentence, he efcaped naked, as it were
out of a burning ; And^one of the Gree^
t Orators tells usXhat to fave a Man out of
the Fire^ was a common Proverbial Speech.

* Tuliy. t Ariftides.

To which I fliall add, That thelfe wordsi
foas hy Fire^ cannot poflTibly denote a Pur-
gatory Fire, becaufe, Firfi^ this Fire is ide-
fign'd for the Tryal of Mens Works, but
Purgatory for the Torment of Mens Souls ;
Secondly^ This Fire is to try every Man's
Work, even thofe who build 6old^ as well
^s thofe who build Hay and Stuthle ;
whereas the Fire of Purgatory only tries
thofe who are guilty of venial Sins ; and,
as the Papifts tell us, iriany there are who
never are try'd by it.

And now fince Bellarmifte tells us, That
this is one of the mod difficult, tho' profi-
table Texts, (which is true, if by profita-
ble he means gainful , for generally the
plainefl Texts are mofl ufeful,) I hope *ti5
by this time manifefl, that Purgatory can-
not be fo plainly proved from it, as tf. C.
would have us believe ; and therefore till
he can bring fome other Texts of Scri-
jpture which are more to the purpofe, and
prove this Dodtrine of •Purgatory more
plainly, I am apt to believe the Reader
will think that N. C. and not the Arch-
bifliop, was wiftaken.

Buty SecofiMy^ N. C. tells us, That he
jreafonably prefumes that His Grace couU
pot produce the Teflimonies of any Learn-
pd Men of the Church of Kome^ who tell
ps, That Purgatory cannot be prov'd (tom
Scripture, becaufe he only quotes Eftius^

[ 203 ]

mh0^ hy the Do&ors own Confejfion^ ^fyfi^^f
that in his Opinion, the Pafage of St. Paul
ahove-cit€d^ does not evince Purgatory j hut
does not fay ^ that other ?ajfage$ of Scripture
do not.

The Archbifhop^s Words arethc(e, All
that ^9ims contends for in this place^ is^ that
it ccmnot he C4)ncluded from hence ^ there is no
Turgatory ; whkh is fomevvhat different
from thofe N. C. cites. But, have they no
other Aiithors who lay the fame thing ?
And , has the Arcbbiftiop cited none?
What doth he think of ^ /^//Jfr, Biftop of
Rochefter^ cited in another place ? Vol. x^
Pofl Ohtt. p. 314. who is of the fame
mind, and which N. C. muft needs know,
becaufe he refers to the very Page in the
next Obje<9:ion. But more than this, does
not + St. Auftin himfelf fay the ftme thing, •
that Purgatory cannot be prov'd from the
Holy Scripture? Tho' 'tis confeft'^, that
he was wavering as to his Opinion, whe-
ther there was any Purgatory or not.

Secondly, His Grace obje<fls againft the
Belief of Purgatory, that Text, Rev. 14.13.
/ heard a Voice from Heaven faying unto tne^

* Pe Vtir^uorio apud ^prifcos , nulla vfl rari^ma fiebdt
vAcntio, Ad. 18. contra Lutherum. ^

t Nee ullus iilli msdiiis locus ut poffit efflt nip cum diaholoy
qui ncn eft cum Chrijfq ; tertium penitus ignordmuSy ima
nee e(fe n Scripiuris San^is invenimus, St. Auguftinus d^
peccatoriim mentis & icmiffione, cap. z8.

C 2P4 3

0rife^ Blejfed are the Dead which die in tU
Lord^ from hencejorth: Tea^ faith the Spi-
rit^ that they may reft from their Lahours ;
and their iVorks do follow them.

From whence His Grace infers, That if
thpfe who die in the Lord are at reft from all
their Lahours and Pains , then this Texc
concludes diredlyagainftthe feigned Pur-
gatory of the Church of Rome^ which (up-
pofeth a great Number, yea, the far great-
eft part of thofe that die in the Lord^ to
have obtain'd eternal Redemption by him
from Hell j not to paft immediately into
Happinefs, but to be detain'd fomewhcre,
(^they are not certain where, but moft pro-
bably in the iSuburbs pf Hell) in great
Pain and Torment, equal in degree to that
pf Hell, and differing only in Duration ;
I fay, to be detained there til! their Souls
are purged from the Defilements they have
contradled in this World, and the Debt
of temporal Punifliments to which they
are liable, be fome way or other paid off,
and difcharged.

They fuppofe indeed, feme very few
Holy Men to be fo perfed: at their depar-
ture out of this Life, that they do imme-
diarcly, and without any flop, pafs into
Heayen, becaufe they need no Purgation;
and thofe likewile whofufTer Martyrdom,
becaufe they difcharge their Debts of tem-
porary Punithments here ,• but the genera*

lity

[205]

iity oiChriftians who die in the Lord^ they
fuppofe fb imperfed:, as to (land in need
of being purgJ ly Fire^ and accordingly
that they are detained a longer or fliorter
tinie, as their Debt of temporary Punifli-
ments is greater or le(s*

But how is it then^ that St. john (ays,
that thofe that dye in the Lord are happy,
becaufe they reft from their Labours : If it
be fo, the far great?ft part of thofe who
dye in the Lord ^ are (b far from refling
from their Labours , that they enter into
far greater Pains and Torments, than ever
they endur'd in this World. And there*
fore Bellarmine^ (that their Dodrine of
Purgatory may receive no Prejudice from
this Text) would h^ve from hence forth in
the Text, to be dated from the Day of
Judgment , when he fuppofes the Pains of
Purgatory will be at an end. But why,
from hence forth ihould take Date from the
Day of Judgment, he can give no Rea-
(bn , but only to fave Purgatory , from
being condemn'd by this Text. For
St. John plainly fpeaks of the Happinefs
of thofe that (hould dye after that time^
Q whatever it be ) that he there dcfcribes.
But that time cannot be the Day of Judg-
ment, becaufe none (hall die after that time.

To which N.C. replies; Firft^ That
this feems to be an obfcure and diifficult
Text of Scripture y becaufe His Grace

^

[ "« ]

fpends Co much Time and Paper in explain-
ing of it : And zMy^ That he allows, that
by thofe who dye in the Lord^ are meant,
thofe who fuffer Martyrdom for Chrift's
fake. And then he goes on, Railing after
his ufiial manner , Without any Fear,
Reafon, or Wit. * Wherefore, in my Opi-
*nion, ([fays MC.) he Ihould have given us

* another Interpretation of this Text , or

* have let Purgatory alone. But 'tis no
^new thing to find the DocSfcor pull down
^in one Place, what he built in ano-
*ther: And therefore I am not fiirpnVd
*to fee Purgatory brought in by Head
•and Shoulders, and fpoken againft,

* in feafon and out of feafon. . *Tis Purga-

* tory that reproaches the Sacrileges and

* Depredations of the Dolor's Anceftors

* of worthy Memory, and bears hard up*-
*on their Pofterity,- and upon that ac-
^ count it mufl be cry'd down; left the
*Guiit of the Sacrilege of the Fathers
•fliould fly in the Face of the Children^ and

* give them that Purgatory in this Life,

* which» he would perfuade them , they
*ihall not meet with in the next.

As to the Difficulty of the Text , His
Grace tells us, that tho' there is (bme Diffi-
culty about the Interpretation of fbme
particular Expreflions in them; yet the
general Senfe and Intendment of them is
very plain, and (b vi ^^ijestrs to be^ to any

[ 107 ]
confiderate Reader. Secondly , That tho*
he allows that the Martyrs are certainly
included, and perhaps primarily intended;
by thofe that dye in the Lord; yet there
is no reafon to retrain this general Ex-
preffion to them only. And as for thoft
Railing Accufations , which he brings
againft both the Church of England and
the Government, I have faid enough
already on this Subje<5j and fiace 'tis fo-
reign to the Matter in hand , I (hall not
anfwer him according to his Folly.

But before I proceed , I (hall in(ert s
Paragraph of the Archbifhop's, becaufe it
contains (bme proper Arguments againft
Turgatory^ and immediately follows the
former ; and yet N. C. does not take the
leaft notice of ir.

The Scripture is perpetually filent
about this Dodrine of Purgatory , tha'
there are (b many fair Occafions of (peak-
ing of it; as in the Parallel of the Rich
Man and LazaruSj where the Future State
is fb particularly defcrib'd, yet there is
no mention made, nor the( leaft intimation:
given of this Third Stzte. But befides the
Silence of the Scripture about it, there are
feveral PafTages utterly inconfiftent witfr
it ,• as, namely, St. Paufs Difcoarfe in the
beginning of the Fifth Chapter of the Se-
cond Epillle to the Corinthians^ where he
plainly declares, the affurance he had that

[168]

k\\ fincere Chriftians^ fo fbon as they quit
the Body, do pafs into Happinefs ; For we
knowy that if our earthly FJoufe of this Taher-
nacle were diffolved^ wb have a Building of
Cody a Houfe not made with Hands j eter^
nal in the Heavens. The plain meaning
of which is, That fo (bon as we quit the
one, we (hdll pafs into the other. And
this Confideration, he tells us, made Chri*
ftians weary of this World, and willing id
die, verm x* For in this we groan earneftly,
defiring to he cloath'd upon with our Houft;
which is from Heaven; and, ver. 4, For
we that are in this Tahernack do groan^ be-
ing burthen^ d. Btrt had Chrijlians believ'd,
that the greateft part of them, when they
left the body, were to go into Purgatory,
to be terribly tormented there, they would
dot have been in fbch hafte to die , but
would have protra(9:ed the time as lon^
as they could, and have contentedly born
the Burthen of this earthly Tabernacle, ria-
ther than to quit it for a Cbndition i
thoufand times more intolerable. But
St. Paul exprefly fays , That Chrifliani
know the contrary ; and that as foon as'
ever ihey went out of the Body, they
(hould be happy^ and with the Lord; and
that this gave them courage againft the'
Fears of Death, ver. 6. Therefore we are aU
ways confident y ^apprrei Zf rxrccpiofe, bono igi^

tur animo fumus ; therefore we are always'.

o#

ctfgbodi 6dbrage, knwing that fibhiiflpi^
i^ tfif j&^nif itfi the Body^ we are ahfent frm
tfsie. Lord ; ind, iven ^ We Hfe^ of goojsi con*
^gtj I fajfj and vfilltMg rjfttber to;^ /f ^.^
fent from the Body^ at^d pri^eni tvitb^ $bt
tord: The plaid &n(e of wjiidji W,Tbal^
Cbriftiani were Williog/ ratber ^t6j die tbafl
to^live, becaufe they. kntt\^j that fbiopii
»^theyJr/if the Body ^ arid departed this
life, they (botild be preient widl ^e

of Ptfrka*

But now if die Podrihe of PiTrgt
tory be true,. this whble R^a(bning.o^
Sb Fm/. proceeds tipon a grofs roiflaKe ^
and therefore I am certainjt is. not true. .
But) as If. C. fays, tbct Third Objedioq'
the Dodor brings is, That wehayea^erj^
ionfiderabfes 6ibfhnttail, Reafon to ckimv^ti
ais few ds f)6fifibly ^e can, from going, xd
Purgatory ^ b0cau(e (fays be} the moro
we put in. fear of goipg thither, the Ma^-.
ket of Indalgentes ^as he calls ic^ fiC^t^
the higher^ «Qd.the profit thenc^- *cdra«
uig to the Popes Cotters ^ and the moiof
9nd greater jLegacie^ will be left to ibii
Priefts^. to bire theiir faying of . }Azfks Xoi
^delivery 6f Soiiis ocit 6f i:fa»t Plac9 ^
Torments; . ^.^ ? , / 4 i^ > ^ • < >

V This I fidd isjrgunieiiiu^dd homneni^
^d totaches the fenfible .pa^rt of the P<^.
giih Emilfaries / . their great £>i4ir^ lo^.
tereil Kesr at ftake in ti» maintemsdce ot

this Article cfftlwif Creed, i^nd therefore
^tis no wofideiF if N.C gtbws impademv
and iays ahtit' Mm^ Without regarding;^
Friend or Foe- But not to ^ive my Reader^
the trouble of an Anfwerto rhefe ridicn^^.
loos ExprelHons of his Paifion, let me^AL
Kim calmly, Are not thefe things wbkb'
the Archbiwop objeds Matters of Faft*
Nay, is not this Dodrine attended with far
greater Abufes than any of thole whicb^
arehereinftanc^din? And if /o, what Rci^'
foh had he to cry out ? For fhame Dv^ifrt
gway with fucb mchrifiian Scandals ^ and di
not pit us upon exfofingyonr Credit and Cha^
ra^er anyfdrthcr^ QS'C. CertAnfy, notbu)^
cah niofe expbfe him an4 his Party, than
fech rude Infults as th^fe, tipon the6o«
vernours of our Churcbj and even at fuch'
a tiole when they are iviYMiJtdytnd pari
take liberally of the unmerited 'Gleracncjr
and Indulgence of the Goversriient; > J -

But K C. has an Argumcrtt to prove k .
Ptirgatory, which he thifik^unanfMraifyf
i?/i. thatif It doth appear- thatthfe Primitive
Church did pray for the©ead, that tbeif
Sins might be forgiven them ; tlien it witt
neceiTarily follow, that they believ-d tboft
Souls they- thus pray'd for to be in a place
where they might be help'd ^nd ben^«
fed by their Prayers. - :. :

'■ • But, Firfiy praying for the' Dead doth
jfot fuppofe a Purgatory^ becaufe the Anf^

^ _,., [Jt.;!

dents jitiy'A for maq>j,qf.t^pre, whom the
Tapifii win ac!(no*lp,dg,e, never were iri
Purgatory',- as for Patrifirchs, Propheti,'
and Applliw, o' >itc!]e happy Eftate.it
were i^mpi&ty to malc.e'any <juefl:ion. 5^-
hiidl;^^ S^caufe u e havc.plany inftances of
«{oie wliq did telie*e and praflice Prayer
^i^ji^'i, tjeiuj'j and yet.' fl'ever believ'd a
^\xt^m%f'i particularly. the Gretk ChiircS.

To jli'is ^. Q anfw^rii Firjf^ By deny-
ing thai Prayers were m'ade fpr th6 Ap<>-
Jiles, Martyrs, or the Virgin marj.

Secondly, That 'tis a' Jharaefiil Eva^oii ttf
Conclude, that the PrlrflU'iye Church diij
hot Nliw.e Purgatory, Iwcaule! they pray'^
foTtheTirgiri A/tfry,4hd.the Appftles,:an4
^ahxr?. V ■ ' ' ■ ;."". ' . -'.'.'
. . That Praters were riiade jbr tatriarcfis,
trOph'ct;^ ^f -. is evidemfroin the ConftU
tution'p o(' C/^mfa/ , lit^^. caf>.\%. Offeri*
itius j>re'Jis'qi4i tiii pUcftsrmt d fecah.prti
SaHhiiX^tr'archiSt Trophetis^ gfc. J*3ay, i?^
N. C. cooVefles, The Roman Mijal doth the
(ameho*; it offers upPxayersfor, and in'
honour of the Apoftles, Martyrs, and th^^
blefltrd .Virgin Mai^. ' But then C^y^ ^0
thcfe priyers are notin.cendcd for ihc dc-
fivtry .«t their Souls from s'ny Pains, STc,:
And \4;hq ever faid they were ? But we
fiy th^c (torn bcnce it is evident. That
prayer for the Dead is nor (uch an i:)ta'i-
faieraliU krguratnt to proVe'a Parg,ato(Y-,

till]

becanie many of thore they pra^ fbr;
£?y their own Confeffion, neVeif were in
Purgatory ; And the Church in the firft
Ages did f^ot belieVe a Purgatory, ihct
they us'd (bme (bit of Pnyer fortheOeadi
The truth is, *twai ail eairly cofiom in
(he Pifimitivie Chu/cb, to make (bme kind
6f Nteniorial for the Dead, which 4nickly
came to be us'd in form of af Piraf er : they
thought the Soiils wei'e nfot in j^erted; Reft
and Happinefs till tHe Reftirrt^ioii } this
Opinion they might probably imbibe fi^om
the Philolbpby of PlatOf whidi had to6
l^reat ad Influence oh (he Opinions of the'
grft Cbrifii'ansyiti6 was one Reafod why ffiat
Caveat of thb Apbftfe was gi^en toc6em^#
Beware of vain fbihfophy. From hence Origem
took his Notion, that after fome time the
damn'd in Hell, and even tbeDefils; (bottld
ht (av'd. And tbefe Philofophicaf C^pinion^
By degreesf, were fofm'd' i'fito a belief of
Purgatory f which has (idbe been fo fruit-
ful of Errors aiid Hii^rftitious Pradibes,
fuch as Indulgences, Mades for the Di»d,.
'^i(ions. Apparitions, tSc. as hi\^e tended
veiy much to the dilcredit of (heChriftisdif
Religion, sfnd to propagate Jitefi^iori and
Atbeifih in the Woild ; and' then 'tis no'
wonder that this' Handle wasf tootbholdof,
rb deprive th6 Church of tHbfe Rerenlies
which were obtain'd by fuch ill Art^, and
a^ly'd to fuch Cuperfiitiotfs md onwan^n-

table Ufey.

J> . ■ '

iOflN'DVLGENCES.

CQiiferaidg^Indulgences j there is fg
itniich diflerence ampngft the Popifti
Writers 'themfelves, that 'tis a very di£B.
leult matter to form any joft Notion of
the Do^oie of the Qburth of Romt about
them. ' '

The Council of trent 6n!y tells us, That
the Power »/ Indulgencts Vfat left in the
Cbureh fy Cbrifi, an J that the ufe of them
is very betpfnl to Chriftian FeofU ; but dotI|
not detendine Iiow and in What manner
it is helpfiil, whether by freeing us from^
the Quik or from the PuniAment of our
Siof { if from the Punifliment, from what
Ibit 6f iPifnifliment ; whether the Eternal!
pr Temporal, or the Ceqftires and Diipi-
pline ofthe Church^

't?T|$trtte, M C. tells us, That 'tis only
f firom t^ laft ; and that Indulgence is n^
f thing elfe but a Relaxation, or Remillioa
f of (bmepart of (or all) thofe penitential
f Works to which a Sinner is liable by the
f CanCtns of the Church ; which Remifllon
^ is granted by the Pa((ors, but efpecially
^ byThe' chief Pallor of the Church, upoii
tibm^ weighty Confiderations , for thi
* greater benefit and advantage of the Faitht
vs^ in geqcK^l. And that the t^oman Ghurfk

.' neither means by Indulgences, oor pror

* teadiXo.ifly SfiOf^ th9iu:h&.fyimq Rower,
f whkh the l>tifdi£(#»¥MeK^/ob\haiyid

* pra(Stis*d, /. e. ©f diipenfing with or' re-
•/mujing.ilie jf^flgwces iir«grJy^rfiSjrth|
uCanon* t gpr,f}i^J%;Br^«pdiP5>#penl|
t mh my ^a^/rfffl ^epefltt^j^ifcyj j^w
f^rQb^^ienffpi t^ffjh&Mjy ^Q5>ri£cr'At>4i
f:tfe«:. therciiina?\Q«SDjvifls ps :Q|g# ittj

* that Church who doth not hold, thatritjijjt
*» M^l .and ;^i^l^i<«U.W6fl 1 t^.S jp if .^f-

1»M« i/J/4&'^;,t»jgiy^or r^fi^vft^at^uftdpney^.

iitMt there .hwei fegep m¥^. VW^fes ^ t*«

* jfjjklter iiq,jther^%.c;6 oif ^fl»ffe^b»«.tt«ii
^h«y arerfQ;||r^/ropi cooptejftjiwiflg/ofi
n.*!pfl«i9«>tlitfmi. ?that, it ift t^'v(i<magl^
i A^fiOies and,ri»«-/#r^ oftl^^ifj^flrfs^ tfe^t

* Silj Tuch (hp»J4. fee. entirely i(t>0)li(}i'4 «p4
f-^jtkefl away,-,j, •■ . , ;.i..>:jfn:- '• ■«-

I'his is a very fmooth af^ipiattTipl^ A^^
U}g» tor qae ^.^yilefl: laJwl .fnflft.l^^nda-
|q;is Pra<ai/ee%:\v.^i$h sve «l)aflgp'jtf|^oo,^e

^aEt^BQffsna AS ffar remove /r(99>rf nutij'
as--Liftht: ig fwnfcjDarknefs. Pm btpauffiJ
/jfif Graca ,!it4R feid very li|r!c upon ^i
Siibjea'y i (ball..^nly m^ke^eitfa.-oi thre^
Prewarfes ,op(lI|jis, Acco«ot; J^bichrJ^i-cP.
has given ;i^$t^»d (o^ for :thi;9| tixne* take
leave of jny Authior. •••.....;..•, 4j,

* And, j^irfiy wijl N. C« affirta^ That la^

' ■ ' dulgenfie

Ci'5 3

dulgcncGris: 7 nodiipg el(e but a RemiiTioii
ofchofePtanitenttal Work$» towhich a Sio^
iievis:IiabtobytheXan<ms of this Church >
]|ut:if ehif was^true, what need they tallc
fivrooctf of'the Treafure cdf the Church ?
VKhy d<xitheir«iIndQlgcfic(s run for the
Dead^ aild ifaofe who are in Purgatory, as
well 'as theLiving; What need is there
of the diftiiacSiGffs of Plenary,, more Plenar
tjl^iJind tnbfl/PLena InduJgences, and
(iichlike} And, can there be any thing
moTf^tvidknt^ than that the puUs of their
^fil^^t pfocdife ^d .f]uil pardon of all Sins,
arilrcedosi from the Guilt as. well as the
Pdniifaiaeiirof Ski? And can. we imagine,
iditt if the People did not thus.underftand
Acm, tbey would part with fb much Mor
ney for the purchafe of tljemi
1nSec09i^fy, He' tells us^:T:htL. the Roman
Church means nothing eUerby tlndulgenoes,
bat the fame Power whichcht* Primitive
Fathers both had. and praVli^'d^ But this
is evidently falfe; neither can he bring
any^ Inftance of -this PHFa^i^e -hi the iirft
ll^Ceffturies'^^twas ai\Dod:rin^ that crept
into \kk^ RoniifbGhurcb after the heliefiiof
Pnrgatoty was /ettled, and upheld (bJelj
hf the t>bmporai:Iru:ere^ of the Fopts^ And
the^ainiul Markets which they made
by it^ But this\fC C. denies^ iand telUiis^
That ^tik finfuL and .diabolical, to give^or
receive any Money for Indulgences, n»y^

the Sia of Simim Magus ^ and that tiaf» of
their Divines or Cafbifis aUo\iir ol iu. .

'Tis very ftrange that any Man Aoold
(o coofidently dedy what can foa (b cttfily
prbv'd; what is evident from WStocfi^
from the very Bull$ of their f^pei^ front
their own WiritiiigSt and from their coft^
(lant and daily Sradice;. This ts ic^tm
toriousy that I £ball only give an inflaode
or two of it^ and leave theilefdejr to Judgt
fpr him/elf. ^ : ; ! ^-^ \:'K j-^

And Firft, Did not the PuhlUhing Icn
dulgences,- and letting them to Sale,' giv^
Occafion to Luther ^ to Preach againft thk
Church of Rome? . WbakAVasik that; btt
found Co mvLch Fault with, bat ihaclkaf
the Tenth fendine Indulgences thrtiughotfb
all Chriftendom^rfet them at high Priced
and colledcid vafl Sums of Money ; part of
which he diilributed to (everai Perfi)ns,ai!idl
particularly ta bis! Sifter y Magdakni Di4
not Boniface the Ninth infert this. Clauf&iq

: ; ■ • ^ bi^

• ••,-.;■ .

■ ■ . ■ I ■ ■ I) ^W^ii^^l— »— pa . I J » ■ I »^ ■ I ■■ ■ . 1 I IM^Jh>li» ■

* • - . • . \ f - .

t Seguendo quefii effewpii Ijeon^^ c.ofi iomfigr
tiato dal Cardinal Santi pattro pianio imi
JnJiil^efizay & rentijjiofte depcccati^^er tut ft
ie Regioni dt Chrijitani c$ncedenm^ a cH
toutri^uiffi: Janari ^ ali^fffdeudo^ anco (4
mOrti • per i qnali quaudifojfe fOitiki lejiorri
fatione^ voldva che jcffcra Uberati Julie p($f
4tl fur gator io. ■ v ^ :,- ^vo:

fasJ^aO^y f$rrige)$tihs Mam ^ittrkesi
Wliich ifi pUiti ^i%li^ is V'f 0^ thofe whd
would giyiB Mooey ^ tl)efQ;liIiiy is thero;
not a Book extant* ipntitled » foxi^ C^it^/r;
^iiiir ^M»i^i wUcb .taiyiBs an Accoudt
^the oiflfercfit Rates, wwch Iiidnlgence»
Cor^vera^ (oftv.pf Sitt&:.ate;. fiec. at; a^d,'
«sai]ADth(^oC«hPMro\iini'.coioplaifls, noc
e«^y t(^e$ Mml J)nhj9ard-f>{ CHfl^es, but
jglyesrf ILicea^Clbr fitQll.Qf thtm, i^nci:
Ablblutioo lor !»l| » at a ytiy eafyRate ?
Is it pot eafy to ^ve a Thdiutod Evideo-
pel of ^ lAuter ? \Anid yet this Man
wiiu b<^ 119 dowp y ij]^ jjiere; is no fuch
IJ^as Biiytng tif Sdlliog; Ipdalgepoos in
tb? .Church of Rtm* s Tmi <lo io' indeed
wff9ffMai(ti QmfHfrfCh where the Pradice
t9. npt (b Qoinmon ; but in Popifi Cmw-
Iffiaf rhey turn the Tables ; and there yoi|
flvil; hear nothing , but of the TreaHiry 6f
ibe Cfiurch', and pf fhe Plenitpde pf
Ppwfr |:oqfeK'd t)0pn St> f «iffr ^and his

• ••:-. ..-•; Sue-.

— »-w— — — ■— ^*— ~— — — I II .

J.' '■* '•'*.* . k. ' '

Jmperocbe bmendo egli dtii i^vj^ pailif
^at^ (a univerfaJfi ccnc^g^e Jeilt fn^lgenze
^firitui una farte Jelle remiite^ pf}^^ cbe
fajfcrf, \ rac(flf(i^ ne hn femyt4U ; donando
^-dfv^f^fi U f^cnutt di dtvajt Trrvincie &
njith^^do OMop dUun^ per la Jua camera. In
particglare 4fono il tratto delle Indulgenze
dcUa Jiajfofiia^ (§ di quel hr actio di QermA--
Miti '^^^ di la camina fino al mart^ a Mada^
k^a fua SQrilla. Hift.ddCoiici\.TtV^.^^ \-

fbe poor;Po«>ide> mpliditiiclttelwtfbiil^'

tbatts tdM>'^he»^i>anci ff viMib WCErtf-iteW

9>f«/«r)i^<i/ i»aNoiillbdlievi^x3 >l>^o:j s ior

: But pei1iaptvjer.c>#m (6jr^V<il«^ diefil
tte the Abttreii3UbiV con^SiilB »iMfi|" -wfii^

comp4aiiil<p0l^ ^md > BCltii6^isdgi<l J }e)t^
igo at 'Tttn i(jOai^il'\)ii^ti»fi9ol A^d'ytlt
no Redlrtt&coidtl be 4a6fealf^cli6^ »b^|(^Ai^
not ther0Abua»:^i%ai^ji Ist idR^isf>»pe»,i
md Biflib^s)tqdlG6vertrdt«>w4h^Cite;«(i
«hd cofitiiiiftil4t fhd^dflfyj^^ild ho^ lfei»

Peoplev'o^.tlidir Gobd$v^ bsicfb 1«lll2ff!ieili

intof a(kep'andfafcalie«d#i«srPi}aadilrtfiit0
their Soirifi) under 'pretegfWOf'pin'd^i^ite
^ir Sine. ''N^>4s not rile hmfii'd tlm
Etodrirte HKide or Artijple W^fikli /<«bR]U
ktely neceffary to be believ'd , in order
to SalvatiotT j;— by cvcryMcmbcr oip^ the
Chrii):ian'Ghuroh? . • M'VjtiA v wj^tA

V \yeil| bqt fays If.O. ^ WfMie i)f tbe^ht^
f of BeUeylng^ this and th^'^fet- Ppiiits"ti»f
*'the P^pifk^^K^i th(f*W0itave not- fo
f mocb ' AiTur^mce of ^eii» beift)^ '0i^B«

* Truths, as 'we have of o^b^tht(igs,'^(nf

* can this'^-htirc any body ? ^r- tocM U.
I infinite ^Harai in not believing , beoiii^

... * . » > V

h^fmk itiiQdldibapped^itfmtclthe^.Pm
^fldd d^s^polUiaKiiowhere^iiB/^'the^Ilartn
^-oiUfidkd.iddasrrabiD^ the Qhurcb ?:£ . /:

Avedi^Md tkad toH0edt to aBTrahfflg with*
^faitskpQwing '^hy^'^or wfaentiblfefV' ' ^ not
FMh^ buc GrodttlitTi ^Ht^htdi is? (bcf^r from
hsiag coinm8nidabte^>M that it: generally
hotign/ii Me» into nAm moll : iottift^Crrors^
and the mof); fupdrfl^totis^aiid imreafbn^
sMe (Prtdiioes;^ Opd has giveti as.ffaeHoly
Scrij)tttre^tQ be tte Riilebf oiir Faith, and
cib%x«ide Aof/6uf'A<%ions; :he:hds given
inr^Rfltionat'lSoultd'coniuier thein, ami
raabp life of them ta our.Oomfbrt and
Advantage; Ihd expe<3^ thatura fhould
i^r biAi vppthe^S^rviceoCfe^Man, a Ra;
tidnal ^Service iai;lroceedfng^<froniChoic0
9fidiKao^led^e^>i.m)d difbded :bf tho(9
Riiies. which, he has' given us fj ^rtd who«>
pf^er:worihiiis him^ioicitii ItkeMkms^^f hi$
oirti Braincv' and; gives himfelf«ip)i«o tiie
66nchi(9 of !tholeYB{ind GhBtciei^' whofe
Defign is m malie^ Mercbandi^e^ «f their
firofelytes , and: whofe whole R<tte is

jooly 'ao^ Alt to (tipp<nt the TnHponi
jGrfcatnds of the Church of Rmte » iofietd
9f a WeUdmep g9od Mi fgitbfiil Sirmmi^
wUl be ask'd , ^f ref9And tbeh ibiwgi
from him i But ttjiis if not 'ftU.i For theier
ixt ieVerd of the Dodrines of the Chuitlif
of Rime^ which neceflarily engage Mea
io the Pradice of the moft Ijdaous Siosf
(uch as Superftitiooi Uadia!pi«U>lrad^^
UtKji andexpofethebeft'mefcniQg'Meapf
their Commiuiion to atoarent Dteogor of
Etera^ Damnatioa :Btit.b)r thofe who Jhave
\»tnhte^-frotefiant$^ and knowingly 'rad
wtiiiQgly : run into th^fe^ins, I will \ikiv%
thQm to God's Merqr f bnt ca^ give fheia
fib Hopes of Salvation, at idli according t«
the Tenor of the Gofj^el.

And becaufe they glor v (o miidi in the
Nutqber of their Pro^ly^ ^. and how
many they bring over tadie Fnfifi ReUU
^ion ; whereas^ as /f. C t^lls us, the Fr«b
defiant Faith doth not make any Brogiei^.
I fliail conclpde with a Paflage or tw6
from the Archbifliop s Sermons, EJit.j^
Ohit. (hewing us in (bme meafure the
Reafon of it. ^ And here, (ays Bii Grkcr^
I might take notice likewife, whit world4
]y and indireA Means they commonlyi
make life of, to make Difciples and ||aia
Profelytes , by Flatte^ and FaUhood , by
(Toncealing and miureprefenting their
Podrine^ and Prai^ices, by ^faming

.^leir.AiJvtiiwies with tfnifvh Fidioni
C>liiitiiiieSi;teiiil>tiDg Men from their
Kdigion by Ffomifn of teiSporal Ad-
Vwtages; wbicKwhen they have gain'd
'theqi , they do not always make jgoocL'
tun, «ay_ thing be pore oppofite to th9
jl^^Biitti! of tlie Cbtiuian Religion, thaii
to promote it by Means (b plainly conr
'traiy to the ^ety Sfatnre and pelign of
it) It mild be cpiifefi'd , that nothing
^ni be thore (erviccable to the,Religioa
ik tiu Church 6! Ami; forfncb aSelj.
gion as is calcinated for t& prodtoting
Secular tntereli, is to becanied on by
Secular Arts. And of this ( (ays His
prau'y we have a Famous Inflance in that
Worldly and Secular Church / whicb
now for feVeral Hundred Years hath
more ^urliied the End of Secular Great*
deli and Dominioh , than any otheif
Chnrc& hafh done the tads of True
Religion, the Glory of 6od, and"
the Salvation of Men's Soals< Ss
^at there is hardly any Dodirine or Pra4
Oitx peculiar to that Church , and dil>
lering (rom our common ChriAiamty, buti
k hath a dire^'and vifible tendency to the
prombting of fome Worldly Intereft at
other. For Inflance, Why do they deny
tfe Piidpte the Holy Scriptures , and the'
Service of God in (tich a Language which'
tley em uhderlUhd > Sac t£at by keep-'

th^ih, W %*? peiffeia >3Mevf- aind-Sbb-
tfieir^ J^gffe to M^^i^ » "^'Btft thitt^^tejy

Canim'a'i ' But to: je^ f eobte W Av^ •

by the'feiowledge'6r;tti'ilrr Se«^ Wfi^

muft , the tlaity oiiry recetve thfe ^aci-a*

ment' iri One Kind, btrt to*' dti'w a grjsirtct

Revefeitctto the PtJ^ ,^ Wfidfc PrMeg^

it ftjrff' be to receive inf B6?H? ' Attd.^®'

is the Jritetmbn of thfiPrieCf^nede^ry'^

the Efficacy bf thV S^^f kmetits ? Biit tb

periwadii%0 Peopid, • tH* iifbtu^ithftttritdf ilg

the jQfraclcftts , Inteottdti of (9bd tdv^afds

Nfartfci^af ,' they c^aiiaot be fav'd -^ithotit

ehei(3doMfk'of the'Pfieft? TheDoiaHtte*

of PjjVgii/qry and Indfilgeiices, are a pl^'rf

D6vfce' ;to.tnake their Markets of th<5'$ih*

and SouIsTTof Men,Sf<:.rmight inftiifeeih

a Hundred Thing"! there iri that Cbtird^^

WhicS are of the (anw tendency. Bucthait

which'ismcift reniarkaiDle is, that Si. fdS/t

forett^i^'^fhat it (hould be the Charatfei'.bf

AntiQhnft'/ thaft.he ihould be of a WidHdhy

Spirit , aiid -the. Dcidirines fiich ai fltOu.lcl

ferve. a^§ectf]ir Irtte'reft and befignj ifoh.

4^ $.' Th^ ari;'cf tht'lVerU, an^ thej/ 'ff^eak

front thi'w'or id y aitd'-the Wiirld hedrSthtAK-

. And tbo' I do' hot from hence" InTeiV

y'^ej ttjiofc ^llAYfi reg(p«itp\fay with my

h^4)is^^^^ ^^if \ H^R?«I CryAould i

come «fter Aiaick^ifi^ wbict^ (hfii9la de-
fer ibe him by thofeP^r^^fr^^i^j which he j
is decypher d in the Bihle^ the Pope would «|

certainly J)& apprehendedior him«^ 1-

And now having given a (hort ^ but I
hope a di{lin(3: add facisfa^ory Anfwer to
to all thofe Ob)edions If. C. has brought
agaioil tht,MchhifbQp\ Sermons ^> J. ihalt ;

conclude with the Profeflion of a Sincere
Love and Hejurt^ G W PF#^ to t
of our Adversaries J and my Prayers^ That
WLhat.l have W-ri^ may b^, ufefut to ope^
their Eyes, and^f oqvince tt)e^ Judgmei;its|
Tibat they mayfeein^k^s their Pof^^he tbhgt
which belong^ ,to 4beir Peace . and Eternal
Welfare. And to this Ena^. u\

1 . - V, • • ■ ' A • * . t ■ * 1 •• »

i^ri/, »^ hefeech thee to keep thy

Church and Houfhold continually in thy

true Religion ; that \hiy who do lean

. only upon , the Hope of thy Heavenhj^

.^ Graie^ may evittnore he defended by thj

fnighty:?^vieri through Jefia Chrifi ouf

•..: : curler d, .-

^T * ► ' .-.■ j^ :-n w ,■; .". . .'7

\ © 'I^M; phi 'hhji: taught kxythat all dur

\v^f,-.d9i%Si^i»ltkpHt. Charity are nothings

worthy fend thy Holy Ghoft^ and pour'

into our Hearts that moft excellent

t ^ul

bifi tfChift^^ the vdj Bimiiftei^
W vfAl V'trmi \ whhiit mhkb mkit.,
fpeverUvet»\ ii ifkmt^ii Meid hefeti
ibee. erwt tbfsfor ibfrnhSmi Jiftti
Cbri/t his fake, Mtn. Amtii

A . X •
... -. ••»• •• "V •• •• "-• •

•', ■

■

F I N I S.

,»•.■■■

ifDVERTISEMtNr.

IWf Ir^r^ infer tea the chief rf the Enrata^f
vJbiciF either pervert or ohfcure ihe
Senfit. Many mort theri dri^ ( ef^eciaUj:
iihin I quote N.. C!s own Worii , whith t
heme taken care pmHudlfy to tranfcrihe)
ibhich are not to he imfnted to the Prefi.

ERRATA:

|3Ag.to^ 1. X4. n-day appointe4 for. pi.xx.Lx4S.
JL t. fecood: p. 1^. 1. 1^. r. Gmifc. p. 3A^i*t^* r. nob
not St. fit&; f^;39. L T- r* ts.a new. pL 44. 1; icm r. hii»
p. 4^. L iz. r. thefc p;^7* r. pibbkav p.70. L franil.
r. intended, p. 88. L 13. r. as. p. 81; L if. r. aJ&d this,
p. 84. 1. II. r. the. p. 10^. 1. 6. r. vendmch. p. 109.
L ir r. imegfm. .p. 109. 1. 31. r.' thus. pC iijA.^ tf
for. p. 111. j^tnmt. r. yhtoosSv. p. x<x. r. ffrmwmtn .
p0 ili. I. s. f. of. p. 131, L ^ dk&iii ifs.l tiiHk thatf
pf xf^.L3.r. was.^

■ftir*.*-.' '"iv

^^•-■■;.;r^

MiS5fE*:^^-"'-7^

■T —J

. 1 ♦

' «■

' 1»

\t-'

«

■ X

^»--

Ik'

l>

^

.?.

*.

r

\ .